Advertisement

Development and evaluation of the INSPIRE measure of staff support for personal recovery

  • Julie Williams
  • Mary Leamy
  • Victoria Bird
  • Clair Le Boutillier
  • Sam Norton
  • Francesca Pesola
  • Mike Slade
Original Paper

Abstract

Background

No individualised standardised measure of staff support for mental health recovery exists.

Aims

To develop and evaluate a measure of staff support for recovery.

Method

Development: initial draft of measure based on systematic review of recovery processes; consultation (n = 61); and piloting (n = 20). Psychometric evaluation: three rounds of data collection from mental health service users (n = 92).

Results

INSPIRE has two sub-scales. The 20-item Support sub-scale has convergent validity (0.60) and adequate sensitivity to change. Exploratory factor analysis (variance 71.4–85.1 %, Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin 0.65–0.78) and internal consistency (range 0.82–0.85) indicate each recovery domain is adequately assessed. The 7-item Relationship sub-scale has convergent validity 0.69, test–retest reliability 0.75, internal consistency 0.89, a one-factor solution (variance 70.5 %, KMO 0.84) and adequate sensitivity to change. A 5-item Brief INSPIRE was also evaluated.

Conclusions

INSPIRE and Brief INSPIRE demonstrate adequate psychometric properties, and can be recommended for research and clinical use.

Keywords

Recovery Support Measurement Psychometrics 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge the support of the PICuP Clinic at the Maudsley Hospital and the other mental health teams in recruiting participants. This article presents independent research funded by the NIHR under its Programme Grants for Applied Research Programme (Grant Reference Number RP-PG-0707-10040), and in relation to the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre for Mental Health at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and Institute of Psychiatry, King’s College London. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health.

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Anthony W (1993) Recovery from mental illness: the guiding vision of the mental health service system in the 1990s. Psychosoc Rehabil J 16(4):11–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Slade M, Amering M, Oades L (2008) Recovery: an international perspective. Epidemiol Psichiatr Soc 17(2):10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Australian Health Ministers (2009) Fourth national mental health plan: an agenda for collaborative government action in mental health 2009–2014. Commonwealth of Australia, CanberraGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Department of Health (2011) No health without mental health: a cross-government mental health outcomes strategy for people of all ages. Department of Health, LondonGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Higgins A (2008) A recovery approach within the Irish Mental Health Services. A framework for development. Mental Health Commission, DublinGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lester H, Gask L (2006) Delivering medical care for patients with serious mental illness or promoting a collaborative model of recovery. Br J Psychiatry 188:2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Killaspy H et al (2012) Psychometric properties of the Mental Health Recovery Star. Br J Psychiatry 201(1):6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Williams J et al (2012) Measures of the recovery orientation of services: systematic review. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 47:1827–1835CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Borg M, Kristiansen K (2004) Recovery-oriented professionals: helping relationships in mental health services. J Ment Health 13(5):13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mancini M, Hardiman E, Lawson HA (2005) Making sense of it all: consumer providers’ theories about factors facilitating and impeding recovery from psychiatric disabilities. Psychiatr Rehabil J 29(1):8Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Turton P et al (2011) One size fits all: or horses for courses? Recovery-based care in specialist mental health services. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 46:10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bellack A (2006) Scientific and consumer models of recovery in schizophrenia: concordance, contrasts, and implications. Schizophr Bull 32(3):11Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Roberts G, Wolfson P (2004) The rediscovery of recovery: open to all. Adv Psychiatr Treat 10:13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Slade M, Thornicroft G, Glover G (1999) The feasibility of routine outcome measures in mental health. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 34:243–249CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Leamy M et al (2011) A conceptual framework for personal recovery in mental health: systematic review and narrative synthesis. Br J Psychiatry 199:8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Le Boutillier C et al (2011) What does recovery mean in practice? A qualitative analysis of international recovery-oriented practice guidance. Psychiatr Serv 62:7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Slade M (2010) Measuring recovery in mental health services. Isr J Psychiatry Relat Sci 47(3):206–212PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Crawford MJ et al (2011) Selecting outcome measures in mental health: the views of service users. J Ment Health 20(4):336–346CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Slade M et al (2010) The contribution of advisory committees to large studies: case study. BMC Health Serv Res 10:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Russinova Z, Rogers E, Langer Ellison M (2006) Recovery-Promoting Relationships Scale: RPRS manual. Center for Psychiatric Rehabilitation: Boston University, BostonGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Nabati L et al (1998) Adaptation of a simple patient satisfaction instrument to mental health: psychometric properties. Psychiatry Res 77:51–56CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lorenzo-Seva U, Ferrando P (2006) FACTOR: a computer program to fit the exploratory factor analysis model. Behav Res Methods 38(1):4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hurley A et al (1997) Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: guidelines, issues, and alternatives. J Organ Behav 18:7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Timmerman M, Lorenzo-Seva U (2011) Dimensionality assessment of ordered polytomous items with parallel analysis. Psychol Methods 16(2):209–220CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Nunnally J (1978) Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Turner H III, Bernard R (2006) Calculating and synthesizing effect sizes. Contemp Issues Commun Sci Disord 33:14Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Langan J, Lindow V (2004) Mental health service users and their involvement in risk assessment and management. Joseph Rowntree Foundation, BristolGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Boyer L et al (2013) Evaluating the impact of a quality of life assessment with feedback to clinicians in patients with schizophrenia: randomised controlled trial. Br J Psychiatry 202:7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Trujols J et al (2013) Patient-reported outcomes measures: are they patient-generated, patient-centred or patient-valued? J Ment Health 22(6):8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Denhov A, Topor A (2011) The components of helping relationships with professionals in psychiatry: users’ perspective. Int J Soc Psychiatry 58(4):8Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Shattell M, Starr S, Thomas S (2007) ’Take my hand, help me out’: mental health service recipients’ experience of the therapeutic relationship. Int J Ment Health Nurs 16:11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Happell B (2008) Determining the effectiveness of mental health services from a consumer perspective: part 1: enhancing recovery. Int J Ment Health Nurs 17:7Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Topor A et al (2006) Others: the role of family, friends, and professionals in the recovery process. Am J Psychiatr Rehabil 9:21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Bird V et al (2014) Fit for purpose? Validation of a conceptual framework for personal recovery with current mental health consumers. Aust NZJ Psychiatry 48(7):644–653CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Slade M et al (2014) Uses and abuses of recovery: implementing recovery-oriented practices in mental health systems. World Psychiatry 13(1):12–20CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Tondora J et al (2014) Partnering for recovery in mental health: a practical guide to person-centered planning. Wiley, ChichesterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Knaup C et al (2009) Effect of feedback of treatment outcome in specialist mental healthcare: meta-analysis. Br J Psychiatry 195(1):8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Slade M et al (2011) REFOCUS Trial: protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial of a pro-recovery intervention within community based mental health teams. BMC Psychiatry 11:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    NHS Confederation Mental Health Network (2012) Supporting recovery on mental health. NHS Confederation, LondonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Julie Williams
    • 1
  • Mary Leamy
    • 1
  • Victoria Bird
    • 1
  • Clair Le Boutillier
    • 1
  • Sam Norton
    • 2
  • Francesca Pesola
    • 1
  • Mike Slade
    • 1
  1. 1.Health Service and Population Research Department (Box P029), Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and NeuroscienceKing’s College LondonLondonUK
  2. 2.Psychology Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and NeuroscienceKing’s College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations