Recovery community centers: Characteristics of new attendees and longitudinal investigation of the predictors and effects of participation.
Recovery community centers: Characteristics of new attendees and longitudinal investigation of the predictors and effects of participation.
复制标题
康复社区中心：新参与者的特征以及参与预测因素和影响的纵向调查。
DOI：
10.1016/j.jsat.2021.108287
复制
发表时间：
2021-05
影响因子：
3.9
通讯作者：
Hoeppner BB
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kelly JF;Fallah-Sohy N;Cristello J;Stout RL;Jason LA;Hoeppner BB
康复社区中心(RCC)已经扩展到美国各地，作为社会“恢复中心”，通过提供临床护理无法提供的资源来增加恢复资金(例如，就业、住房)。虽然研究支持农村信用社的一般效用，但人们对新参与者的特征、参与度的预测因素、所使用的服务以及从中获得的好处知之甚少。更多的知识将使该领域了解农村信用社的临床和公共卫生潜力。从美国东北部的RCCS(k=7)开始对个人(N=275)进行前瞻性的单组研究，并在3个月后重新评估这些个人使用的服务和他们获得的好处(例如，减少物质问题，提高生活质量[QOL])。回归和纵向模型检验了理论上的关系。参与者大多是年轻到中年、种族多样、单身、失业、受教育程度和收入低、患有阿片类药物或酒精使用障碍、有精神问题史、低生活质量和先前接受治疗/参与互助的男性和女性。出席率差异很大，但平均为每周1-2次，西班牙裔种族预测的RCC参与度更高，旅行时间更短，以前接受治疗，初始社会支持较低，基线生活质量相对较高(总体生活质量较低)。常用和高度重视的服务包括社会支助基础设施(例如康复教练/会议)以及技术和就业援助。在纵向分析中(n=138)，研究观察到禁欲持续时间、物质问题、心理健康和生活质量的改善，但在恢复资产方面没有改善。研究结果总体上与先前的观察一致，即RCC参与并为在临床病理和低生活质量和资源方面面临最大挑战的个人提供好处。
Recovery community centers (RCCs) have expanded across the U.S., serving as social “recovery hubs” that increase recovery capital (e.g., employment, housing) by providing resources that clinical care does not provide. While research supports RCCs’ general utility, little is known about new participants’ characteristics, predictors of engagement, services used, and benefits derived. Greater knowledge would inform the field about RCCs’ clinical and public health potential. Prospective, single-group study of individuals (N=275) starting at RCCs (k=7) in the northeastern U.S. and reassessed 3 months later regarding the services these individuals used and the benefits they derived (e.g., reduced substance problems, enhanced quality of life [QOL]). Regression and longitudinal models tested theorized relationships. Participants were mostly young to middle-aged, racially diverse, single, unemployed, men and women, with low education and income, suffering from opioid or alcohol use disorder, with a history of psychiatric problems, low QOL, and prior treatment/mutual-help participation. Attendance varied greatly, but on average, was 1–2 times/week, with greater RCC engagement predicted by Hispanic ethnicity, shorter travel time, prior treatment, lower initial social support, and relatively greater baseline QOL (QOL was low overall). Commonly used and highly valued services included social support infrastructures (e.g., recovery coaching/ meetings), and technological and employment assistance. In longitudinal analyses (n=138), the study observed improvements in duration of abstinence, substance problems, psychological well-being, and QOL, but not in recovery assets. Findings generally are consistent with prior observations that RCCs engage and provide benefits for individuals facing the greatest challenges in terms of clinical pathology and low QOL and resources.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
3.9
作者：
Laudet, Alexandre B.;Harris, Kitty;Moberg, D. Paul
通讯作者：
Moberg, D. Paul
影响因子：
3.9
作者：
Kelly JF;Greene MC;Hoffman LA;Hoeppner BB;Bergman BG
通讯作者：
Bergman BG
影响因子：
2
作者：
Cloud, William;Granfield, Robert
通讯作者：
Granfield, Robert
影响因子：
2.8
作者：
Cousins, Sarah J.;Antonini, Valerie P.;Rawson, Richard A.
通讯作者：
Rawson, Richard A.
DOI：
10.1080/1556035x.2014.940769
发表时间：
2014-01-01
期刊：
JOURNAL OF GROUPS IN ADDICTION & RECOVERY
影响因子：
--
作者：
Haberle, Beverly J.;Conway, Stacey;Davidson, Larry
通讯作者：
Davidson, Larry