How recovery definitions vary by service use pathway: Findings from a national survey of adults.

IF 3.2 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Paul A Gilbert, Loulwa Soweid, Sydney Evans, Grant D Brown, Anne Helene Skinstad, Sarah E Zemore
{"title":"How recovery definitions vary by service use pathway: Findings from a national survey of adults.","authors":"Paul A Gilbert, Loulwa Soweid, Sydney Evans, Grant D Brown, Anne Helene Skinstad, Sarah E Zemore","doi":"10.1037/adb0001026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>How people define recovery may affect their recovery goals, service use, and ultimately their outcomes. We examined recovery definitions among adults in recovery from an alcohol use disorder (AUD) who had different service use histories.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We analyzed online survey data from 1,492 adults with resolved lifetime AUD in \"treated recovery\" (any use of specialty services, such as inpatient or outpatient rehabilitation; <i>n</i> = 375), \"assisted recovery\" (any use of lay services, such as mutual-help groups, and no use of specialty services; <i>n</i> = 174), or \"independent recovery\" (no use of specialty or lay services; <i>n</i> = 943). Surveys assessed recovery definitions using the 39-item <i>What Is Recovery</i>? (WIR) scale. We compared endorsement of WIR domains and individual recovery elements across groups using survey-weighted chi-square tests and logistic regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Endorsement of WIR scale domains was significantly lower among the independent than treated and assisted groups, but few differences emerged between the treated and assisted groups. Two recovery elements were endorsed by approximately equivalent majorities of all groups: \"being honest with myself\" (92.7%-94.8%) and \"taking care of my physical health\" (87.4%-90.9%). Five additional elements were similarly endorsed by large majorities (≥ 85%) in each group, albeit at lower levels in the independent group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>People who have experienced AUD and have not obtained alcohol services may have a narrower definition of recovery compared to those accessing treatment or attending mutual-help groups. This suggests a need to broaden alcohol services to better match varied recovery definitions; however, some highly endorsed elements suggest commonalities across recovery pathways. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48325,"journal":{"name":"Psychology of Addictive Behaviors","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology of Addictive Behaviors","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/adb0001026","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: How people define recovery may affect their recovery goals, service use, and ultimately their outcomes. We examined recovery definitions among adults in recovery from an alcohol use disorder (AUD) who had different service use histories.

Method: We analyzed online survey data from 1,492 adults with resolved lifetime AUD in "treated recovery" (any use of specialty services, such as inpatient or outpatient rehabilitation; n = 375), "assisted recovery" (any use of lay services, such as mutual-help groups, and no use of specialty services; n = 174), or "independent recovery" (no use of specialty or lay services; n = 943). Surveys assessed recovery definitions using the 39-item What Is Recovery? (WIR) scale. We compared endorsement of WIR domains and individual recovery elements across groups using survey-weighted chi-square tests and logistic regression.

Results: Endorsement of WIR scale domains was significantly lower among the independent than treated and assisted groups, but few differences emerged between the treated and assisted groups. Two recovery elements were endorsed by approximately equivalent majorities of all groups: "being honest with myself" (92.7%-94.8%) and "taking care of my physical health" (87.4%-90.9%). Five additional elements were similarly endorsed by large majorities (≥ 85%) in each group, albeit at lower levels in the independent group.

Conclusions: People who have experienced AUD and have not obtained alcohol services may have a narrower definition of recovery compared to those accessing treatment or attending mutual-help groups. This suggests a need to broaden alcohol services to better match varied recovery definitions; however, some highly endorsed elements suggest commonalities across recovery pathways. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

服务使用途径不同,康复的定义也不同:一项全国成人调查的结果。
目的:人们如何定义康复可能会影响他们的康复目标、服务使用以及最终的结果。我们研究了不同服务使用史的酒精使用障碍(AUD)成人康复者对康复的定义:我们分析了 1,492 名终生酗酒障碍已治愈的成年人的在线调查数据,他们分别处于 "治疗性康复"(使用过住院或门诊康复等专业服务;n = 375)、"辅助性康复"(使用过互助小组等非专业服务,未使用过专业服务;n = 174)或 "独立康复"(未使用过专业或非专业服务;n = 943)阶段。调查使用包含 39 个项目的 "什么是康复?(WIR) 量表对康复定义进行评估。我们使用调查加权卡方检验和逻辑回归比较了各组对 WIR 量表领域和单个康复要素的认可程度:结果:独立组对 WIR 量表领域的认可度明显低于治疗组和辅助组,但治疗组和辅助组之间几乎没有差异。在所有组别中,有两个康复要素得到了大致相同多数的认可:"对自己诚实"(92.7%-94.8%)和 "注意身体健康"(87.4%-90.9%)。另外五个要素同样在每个组别中都得到了大多数人(≥ 85%)的认可,尽管独立组别的认可率较低:结论:与接受治疗或参加互助小组的人相比,经历过 AUD 但未获得酒精服务的人对康复的定义可能较窄。这表明有必要扩大酒精服务的范围,以更好地匹配不同的康复定义;不过,一些得到高度认可的要素表明,不同的康复途径存在共性。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA,保留所有权利)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
11.80%
发文量
165
期刊介绍: Psychology of Addictive Behaviors publishes peer-reviewed original articles related to the psychological aspects of addictive behaviors. The journal includes articles on the following topics: - alcohol and alcoholism - drug use and abuse - eating disorders - smoking and nicotine addiction, and other excessive behaviors (e.g., gambling) Full-length research reports, literature reviews, brief reports, and comments are published.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信