Browsing by Subject "Illness management and recovery"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Consumer factors predicting level of treatment response to illness management and recovery
    (American Psychological Association, 2017-12) White, Dominique A.; McGuire, Alan B.; Roudebush, Richard L.; Luther, Lauren; Anderson, Adrienne; Phalen, Peter; McGrew, John H.; Psychology, School of Science
    OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify consumer-level predictors of level of treatment response to illness management and recovery (IMR) to target the appropriate consumers and aid psychiatric rehabilitation settings in developing intervention adaptations. METHOD: Secondary analyses from a multisite study of IMR were conducted. Self-report data from consumer participants of the parent study (n = 236) were analyzed for the current study. Consumers completed prepost surveys assessing illness management, coping, goal-related hope, social support, medication adherence, and working alliance. Correlations and multiple regression analyses were run to identify self-report variables that predicted level of treatment response to IMR. RESULTS: Analyses revealed that goal-related hope significantly predicted level of improved illness self-management, F(1, 164) = 10.93, p < .001, R2 = .248, R2 change = .05. Additionally, we found that higher levels of maladaptive coping at baseline were predictive of higher levels of adaptive coping at follow-up, F(2, 180) = 5.29, p < .02, R2 = .38, R2 change = .02. Evidence did not support additional predictors. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Previously, consumer-level predictors of level of treatment response have not been explored for IMR. Although 2 significant predictors were identified, study findings suggest more work is needed. Future research is needed to identify additional consumer-level factors predictive of IMR treatment response in order to identify who would benefit most from this treatment program. (PsycINFO Database Record
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The "Critical" Elements of Illness Management and Recovery: Comparing Methodological Approaches
    (Springer, 2016-01) McGuire, Alan B.; Luther, Lauren; White, Dominique; White, Laura M.; McGrew, John H.; Salyers, Michelle P.; Department of Psychology, School of Science
    This study examined three methodological approaches to defining the critical elements of Illness Management and Recovery (IMR), a curriculum-based approach to recovery. Sixty-seven IMR experts rated the criticality of 16 IMR elements on three dimensions: defining, essential, and impactful. Three elements (Recovery Orientation, Goal Setting and Follow-up, and IMR Curriculum) met all criteria for essential and defining and all but the most stringent criteria for impactful. Practitioners should consider competence in these areas as preeminent. The remaining 13 elements met varying criteria for essential and impactful. Findings suggest that criticality is a multifaceted construct, necessitating judgments about model elements across different criticality dimensions.