Recovery definitions: Do they change?
Recovery definitions: Do they change?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2015.06.021
复制
发表时间：
2015-09-01
影响因子：
4.2
通讯作者：
Grella, Christine E.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kaskutas, Lee Ann;Witbrodt, Jane;Grella, Christine E.
背景：“恢复”一词在药物滥用文献和临床环境中被广泛使用，但还没有数据来经验性地验证恢复是如何由处于恢复中的个人定义的。“什么是复苏？”该项目根据全国范围内对正在康复的个人进行的大型在线调查，制定了39项康复定义。本文的目的是在一到两年后报告这些定义的稳定性。方法：为研究反映不同恢复途径的恢复定义，母研究采用密集外展的方式。在同意参与后续研究的受访者中，通过网络和电话进行了跟踪访谈(n=1237)。描述性分析考虑了两次调查中对个别回收项目的认可，汇总分数的t检验研究了样本总体和关键亚组之间的显著变化。结果：在两次访谈中，大多数回收因素对单个项目的背书率都在90%以上，并且有几乎同样多的转变为背书和背书。统计学上有意义的t检验分数是中等大小的，可靠性统计是高的(从782到.899)。结论：纵向分析发现在随访中几乎没有证据表明康复定义有意义的变化。因此，结果表明，恢复的定义发展在父母“什么是恢复？”调查代表了对恢复的稳定定义，可用于指导以恢复为导向的护理系统中的服务提供。(C)2015爱思唯尔爱尔兰有限公司。保留所有权利。
Background: The term "recovery" is widely used in the substance abuse literature and clinical settings, but data have not been available to empirically validate how recovery is defined by individuals who are themselves in recovery. The "What Is Recovery?" project developed a 39-item definition of recovery based on a large nationwide online survey of individuals in recovery. The objective of this paper is to report on the stability of those definitions one to two years later.Methods: To obtain a sample for studying recovery definitions that reflected the different pathways to recovery, the parent study involved intensive outreach. Follow-up interviews (n = 1237) were conducted online and by telephone among respondents who consented to participate in follow-up studies. Descriptive analyses considered endorsement of individual recovery items at both surveys, and t-tests of summary scores studied significant change in the sample overall and among key subgroups. To assess item reliability, Cronbach's alpha was estimated.Results: Rates of endorsement of individual items at both interviews was above 90% for a majority of the recovery elements, and there was about as much transition into endorsement as out of endorsement. Statistically significant t-test scores were of modest magnitude, and reliability statistics were high (ranging from 782 to.899).Conclusions: Longitudinal analyses found little evidence of meaningful change in recovery definitions at follow-up. Results thus suggest that the recovery definitions developed in the parent "What Is Recovery?" survey represent stable definitions of recovery that can be used to guide service provision in Recovery-Oriented Systems of Care. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.