Author/Authors :
J. Williams، نويسنده , , M. Leamy، نويسنده , , V. Bird، نويسنده , , C. Harding، نويسنده , ,
J. Larsen، نويسنده , , C. Le Boutillier، نويسنده , , L. Oades، نويسنده , ,
M. Slade، نويسنده ,
Abstract :
Purpose The review aimed to (1) identify measures that
assess the recovery orientation of services; (2) discuss how
these measures have conceptualised recovery, and (3)
characterise their psychometric properties.
Methods A systematic review was undertaken using
seven sources. The conceptualisation of recovery within
each measure was investigated by rating items against a
conceptual framework of recovery comprising five recovery
processes: connectedness; hope and optimism; identity;
meaning and purpose; and empowerment. Psychometric
properties of measures were evaluated using quality
criteria.
Results Thirteen recovery orientation measures were
identified, of which six met eligibility criteria. No measure
was a good fit with the conceptual framework. No measure
had undergone extensive psychometric testing and none
had data on test–retest reliability or sensitivity to change.
Conclusions Many measures have been developed to
assess the recovery orientation of services. Comparisons
between the measures were hampered by the different
conceptualisations of recovery used and by the lack of
uniformity on the level of organisation at which services
were assessed. This situation makes it a challenge for
services and researchers to make an informed choice on
which measure to use. Further work is needed to produce
measures with a transparent conceptual underpinning and
demonstrated psychometric properties