Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Feasibility and Psychometric Properties of the Recovery Assessment Scale (RAS) in People with Mental Illness for Its Use in Argentina

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation and Mental Health Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Latin American recovery movement is in what could be considered as its infancy, and it is particularly underdeveloped in Argentina. This new concept of recovery should be introduced with appropriate measurement instruments that can identify and evaluate the recovery process and assist providers during treatment. Thus, the present study aims to explore the feasibility and psychometric properties of the Recovery Assessment Scale (RAS) for assessing recovery in Argentina. Three hundred and thirty-seven people with mental illness were recruited from a private mental health institution in Buenos Aires. Five factors were extracted with an exploratory factor analysis and confirmed by confirmatory factor analysis. The final 21-item version showed good acceptability and feasibility, a high overall internal consistency and a reasonable factor structure. Future research in recovery should further address a construct validation of the Argentine version of the RAS and the implications of culture-specific aspects of recovery for measuring this construct, and differences among disorders in the self-report of recovery and its trajectory.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Deegan PE. Recovey: the lived experience of rehabilitation. Psychosoc Rehabil J. 1988;11:11–9.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Lovejoy M. Expectations and the recovery process. Schizophr Bull. 1982;8(4):605–9. https://academic.oup.com/schizophreniabulletin/article-lookup/doi/10.1093/schbul/8.4.605.

  3. Onken SJ, Craig CM, Ridgway P, Ralph RO, Cook JA. An analysis of the definitions and elements of recovery: a review of the literature. Psychiatr Rehabil J. 2007;31(1):9–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Anthony WA. Recovery from mental illness: the guiding vision of the mental health service system in the 1990s. Psychosoc Rehabil J. 1993;16(4):11–23. http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/h0095655.

  5. Deegan P. Recovery as a journey of the heart. Psychiatr Rehabil J. 1996;19(3):91–7. http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/h0101301.

  6. Roe D, Chopra M, Wagner B, Katz G, Rudnick A. The emerging self in conceptualizing and treating mental illness. J Psychosoc Nurs Ment Health Serv. 2004;42(2):32–40. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14982107.

  7. Harding CM, Zahniser JH. Empirical correction of seven myths about schizophrenia with implications for treatment. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1994;384:140–6. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7879636.

  8. Wells EA, Hawkins JD, Catalano RF. Choosing drug use measures for treatment outcome studies. II. Timing baseline and follow-up measurement. Int J Addict. 1988;23(8):875–85. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3066767.

  9. Burgess P, Pirkis J, Coombs T, Rosen A. Review of recovery measures. Aust Ment Heal Outcomes Classif Netw. 2010;1:1–78.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Giffort D, Schmook A, Woody C, Vollendorf C, Gervain M. Recovery assessment scale. Health ID of M, editor. Chicago; 1995.

  11. Corrigan PW, Salzer M, Ralph RO, Sangster Y, Keck L. Examining the factor structure of the recovery assessment scale. Schizophr Bull. 2004;30(4):1035–41. http://schizophreniabulletin.oxfordjournals.org/content/30/4/1035.abstract%5Cn; http://schizophreniabulletin.oxfordjournals.org/content/30/4/1035.full.pdf.

  12. Cavelti M, Beck E-M, Kvrgic S, Kossowsky J, Vauth R. The role of subjective illness beliefs and attitude toward recovery within the relationship of insight and depressive symptoms among people with schizophrenia spectrum disorders. J Clin Psychol. 2012;68(4):462–76. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22331634.

  13. Law H, Morrison A. Recovery from psychosis: a user informed review of self-report instruments for measuring recovery. J Ment. 2012;21(2):193–208. http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/09638237.2012.670885.

  14. Salzer MS, Brusilovskiy E. Advancing recovery science: reliability and validity properties of the recovery assessment scale. Psychiatr Serv. 2014;65(4):442–53. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24487405.

  15. McNaught M, Caputi P, Oades LG, Deane FP. Testing the validity of the Recovery Assessment Scale using an Australian sample. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2007;41(5):450–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Chiba R, Miyamoto Y, Kawakami N. Reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the Recovery Assessment Scale (RAS) for people with chronic mental illness: scale development. Int J Nurs Stud. 2010;47(3):314–22. doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2009.07.006.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Roe D, Mashiach-Eizenberg M, Corrigan P. Confirmatory factor analysis of the brief version of the recovery assessment scale. J Nerv Ment Dis. 2012;200(10):847–51. http://ovidsp.ovid.com/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&CSC=Y&NEWS=N&PAGE=fulltext&D=emed10&AN=2012598262%5Cn; http://bf4dv7zn3u.search.serialssolutions.com.myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rfr_id=info:sid/Ovid:emed.

  18. Mak WWS, Chan RCH, Yau SSW. Validation of the Recovery Assessment Scale for Chinese in recovery of mental illness in Hong Kong. Qual Life Res. 2016;25(5):1303–11. http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11136-015-1157-6.

  19. Young DKW, Ng PYN, Pan J, Fung T, Cheng D. Validity and reliability of Recovery Assessment Scale for cantonese speaking Chinese consumers with mental illness. Int J Ment Health Addict. 2016;15(1):198–208. http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11469-016-9657-3.

  20. Cavelti M, Wirtz M, Corrigan P, Vauth R. Recovery assessment scale: examining the factor structure of the German version (RAS-G) in people with schizophrenia spectrum disorders. Eur Psychiatry. 2017;41:60–7. https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85007448269&doi=10.1016/j.eurpsy.2016.10.006&partnerID=40&md5=d4b5eec5ad2c7f90cd55852388320492.

  21. Almeida Berberian A, Silva TR, Gadelha A, Villares CC, Martini LC, Bressan RA. Validação da Recovery Assessment Scale (RAS) no Brasil para avaliar a capacidade de superação das pessoas com esquizofrenia. J Bras Psiquiatr. 2017;66(1):1–8. http://www.scielo.br/pdf/jbpsiq/v66n1/0047-2085-jbpsiq-66-1-0001.pdf.

  22. Agrest M, Druetta I. The concept of recovery: the importance of users’ perspective and their participation. Vertex. 2011;22(95):56–64. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21505647.

  23. Gabay PM. Recovery: a new paradigm for psychiatry. Vertex. 2011;22(100):454–61. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22799147.

  24. Congreso de la Nación. Ley Nacional de Salud Mental (National Mental Health Law). República Argentina: Boletín oficial; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  25. DSM-IV-TR. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-IV-TR. Lake St. Louis: American Psychiatric Association; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Mundfrom DJ, Shaw DG, Ke TL. Minimum sample size recommendations for conducting factor analyses minimum sample size recommendations for conducting factor analyses. Int J Test. 2009;5(2):159–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Corrigan PW, Giffort D, Rashid F, Leary M, Okeke I. Recovery as a psychological construct. Community Ment Health J. 1999;35(3):231–9. http://link.springer.com/10.1023/A:1018741302682.

  28. Monteiro MF, Ornelas JH. Recovery Assessment Scale: testing validity with Portuguese community-based mental health organization users. Psychol Assess. 2016;28(3):e1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. IBM CORP. Ibm, SPSS statistics for windows. Armonk: IBM Corp; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Arbuckle JL. Amos. Chicago: IBM SPSS; 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Kaiser HF. An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika. 1974;39(1):31–6. http://link.springer.com/10.1007/BF02291575.

  32. Hu L, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model A Multidiscip J. 1999;6(1):1–55. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10705519909540118.

  33. Browne MW, Cudeck R. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociol Methods Res. 1992;21(2):230–58. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0049124192021002005.

  34. Fukui S, Shimizu Y, Rapp CA. A cross-cultural study of recovery for people with psychiatric disabilities between US and Japan. Community Ment Health J. 2012;48(6):804–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Jacobson N, Greenley D. What is recovery? A conceptual model and explication. Psychiatr Serv. 2001;52(4):482–5. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11274493.

  36. Kelly M, Gamble C. Exploring the concept of recovery in schizophrenia. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2005;12(2):245–51. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15788044.

  37. Townsend W, Glasser N. Recovery: the heart and soul of treatment. Psychiatr Rehabil J. 2003;27(1):83–6. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12967237.

  38. Fallot RD. Spirituality and religion in psychiatric rehabilitation and recovery from mental illness. Int Rev Psychiatry. 2001;13(2):110–6. http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09540260120037344.

  39. Russinova Z, Cash D. Personal perspectives about the meaning of religion and spirituality among persons with serious mental illnesses. Psychiatr Rehabil J. 2007;30(4):271–84. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17458451.

  40. Hancock N, Bundy A, Honey A, Helich S, Tamsett S. Measuring the later stages of the recovery journey: insights gained from clubhouse members. Community Ment Health J. 2013;49(3):323–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Udagawa K. 2007 Sekai seishin hoken kaigi in Hong kong sanka inshouki—toujisha no bunkakai de hanasareta koto [World Federation for Mental Health 2007 Hong Kong biennial congress participation memory—what was talked in the section meeting for the people with mental]. Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2008;11(1):79–81.

  42. Garcia-Preto N. Latino families: an overview. In: McGoldrick M, Giordano J, editors. Ethnicity and family therapy. New York: Guilford Press; 2005. p. 141–224. http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/2006-00844-011.

  43. Andresen R, Oades L, Caputi P. The experience of recovery from schizophrenia: towards an empirically validated stage model. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2003;37(5):586–94. http://anp.sagepub.com/lookup/doi/10.1046/j.1440-1614.2003.01234.x.

  44. Schauer C, Everett A, del Vecchio P, Anderson L. Promoting the value and practice of shared decision-making in mental health care. Psychiatr Rehabil J. 2007;31(1):54–61. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17694716.

  45. Atkinson M, Zibin S, Chuang H. Characterizing quality of life among patients with chronic mental illness: a critical examination of the self-report methodology. Am J Psychiatry. 1997;154(1):99–105.

  46. Fleury MJ, Grenier G, Bamvita JM. Predictive typology of subjective quality of life among participants with severe mental disorders after a five-year follow-up: a longitudinal two-step cluster analysis. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2015;13(1):150. doi:10.1186/s12955-015-0346-x.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Brown MA, Velligan DI. Issues and developments related to assessing function in serious mental illness. Dialogues Clin Neurosci. 2016;18(2):135–44. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27489453.

  48. Roe D, Mashiach-Eizenberg M, Lysaker PH. The relation between objective and subjective domains of recovery among persons with schizophrenia-related disorders. Schizophr Res. 2011;131(1–3):133–8. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21669512.

  49. Giusti L, Ussorio D, Tosone A, Di Venanzio C, Bianchini V, Necozione S, et al. Is personal recovery in schizophrenia predicted by low cognitive insight? Community Ment Health J. 2015;51(1):30–7. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25064088.

  50. Berry JW. Cross-cultural psychology: research and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1992.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank all the participants for their time and participation in this research. RedeAmericas, a mental health hub supported by the National Institute of Mental Health under award U19MH095718, collaborated with the original Spanish translation of the Recovery Assessment Scale (RAS) and additional inputs during the preparation of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Research Department, Proyecto Suma, Guemes 4130, C1425BKZ, Buenos Aires, Argentina

    Virginia Zalazar, Joaquín Castro Valdez & Martin Agrest

  2. Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA

    Franco Mascayano

  3. Instituto de Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad de O’Higgins, Rancagua, Chile

    Franco Mascayano

  4. Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK

    Norha Vera

  5. Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA

    Pamela Scorza

Authors
  1. Virginia Zalazar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joaquín Castro Valdez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Franco Mascayano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Norha Vera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Pamela Scorza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Martin Agrest
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Virginia Zalazar.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zalazar, V., Castro Valdez, J., Mascayano, F. et al. Feasibility and Psychometric Properties of the Recovery Assessment Scale (RAS) in People with Mental Illness for Its Use in Argentina. J. Psychosoc. Rehabil. Ment. Health 4, 179–188 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40737-017-0098-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40737-017-0098-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation