Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Using the CHIME Personal Recovery Framework to Evaluate the Validity of the MHRM-10 in Individuals with Psychosis

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Psychiatric Quarterly Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The recovery movement has revealed that outcomes which focuses on just symptoms and functioning may not be holistic and that consumer-rated outcomes may contribute to a more holistic and person-centric care model. However, a brief and effective measure is required in clinical settings; hence, the aim of the current study is to evaluate the psychometric properties of the briefest personal recovery measure- Mental Health Recovery Measure-10 items, using the CHIME (Connectedness, Hope and optimism about the future, Identity, Meaning in life, Empowerment) personal recovery framework. 64 outpatients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder were assessed at two time points, 2 weeks apart. Data collected included sociodemographic information, MHRM-10, Psychological factors related to the CHIME framework, in respective order: RYFF subscale positive relations with others; Herth Hope Index (HHI); Internalized Stigma of Mental Illness (ISMI) and RYFF subscale self-acceptance; World Health Organization Quality of Life- BRIEF (WHOQOL-BREF); Empowerment, and Clinical factors- symptoms as measured by Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, functioning (PSP) and depressive symptoms (CDSS). MHRM-10 demonstrated convergent validity with CHIME personal recovery psychological factors (all ρ > 0.5). MHRM-10 had excellent internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.904) and adequate test-retest reliability (ρ = 0.742, p < 0.001). Initial factor structure analysis revealed a one factor structure. The MHRM-10 is a valid instrument for use and can serve as a tool to facilitate a more collaborative and person-centric model of care for individuals with psychosis.

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. Remington G, Foussias G, Agid O. Progress in defining optimal treatment outcome in schizophrenia. CNS Drugs. 2010;24(1):9–20. https://doi.org/10.2165/11530250-000000000-00000.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Slade M, Amering M, Oades L. Recovery: an international perspective. Epidemiol Psichiatr Soc. 2008;17(2):128–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Lim MW, Remington G, Lee J. Personal recovery in serious mental illness: making sense of the concept. Ann Acad Med Singap. 2017;46(1):29–31.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Karow A, Naber D, Lambert M, Moritz S. Remission as perceived by people with schizophrenia, family members and psychiatrists. Eur Psychiatry. 2012;27(6):426–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpsy.2011.01.013.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Fervaha G, Takeuchi H, Agid O, Lee J, Foussias G, Remington G. Determinants of patient-rated and clinician-rated illness severity in schizophrenia. J Clin Psychiatry. 2015;76(7):924–30. https://doi.org/10.4088/JCP.14m09128.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Fervaha G, Agid O, Takeuchi H, Foussias G, Remington G. Life satisfaction and happiness among young adults with schizophrenia. Psychiatry Res. 2016;242:174–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2016.05.046.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Fervaha G, Agid O, Takeuchi H, Foussias G, Lee J, Remington G. Clinical and functional outcomes in people with schizophrenia with a high sense of well-being. J Nerv Ment Dis. 2015;203(3):187–93. https://doi.org/10.1097/NMD.0000000000000266.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Chan RCH, Mak WWS, Chio FHN, Tong ACY. Flourishing with psychosis: a prospective examination on the interactions between clinical, functional, and personal recovery processes on well-being among individuals with schizophrenia spectrum disorders. Schizophr Bull. 2018;44(4):778–86. https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbx120.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Armstrong NP, Cohen AN, Hellemann G, Reist C, Young AS. Validating a brief version of the mental health recovery measure for individuals with schizophrenia. Psychiatr Serv. 2014;65(9):1154–9. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.201300215.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Leamy M, Bird V, Le Boutillier C, Williams J, Slade M. Conceptual framework for personal recovery in mental health: systematic review and narrative synthesis. Br J Psychiatry. 2011;199(6):445–52. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.110.083733.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Shanks V, Williams J, Leamy M, Bird VJ, Le Boutillier C, Slade M. Measures of personal recovery: a systematic review. Psychiatr Serv. 2013;64(10):974–80. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.005012012.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Abraham KM, Nelson CB, Ganoczy D, Zivin K, Brandfon S, Walters H, et al. Psychometric analysis of the mental health recovery measure in a sample of veterans with depression. Psychol Serv. 2016;13(2):193–201. https://doi.org/10.1037/ser0000067.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bullock W. A, Young, S. L. . The Mental Health Recovery Measure (MHRM). 111th Annual Meeting of the Toronto, ON: American Psychological Association 2003.

  14. Young SL, Ensing DS. Exploring recovery from the perspective of people with psychiatric disabilities. Psychiatr Rehabil J. 1999;22(3):219–31. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0095240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Theodora Campbell-Orde JC, Jenneth Carpenter H. Stephen Leff. Measuring the Promise: A compendium of Recovery Measures Human Services Research Institute vol II. 2005.

  16. Bullock W. A. The mental health recovery measure (MHRM): updated normative data and psychometric properties. Toledo, Ohio: University of Toledo 2009.

  17. Jiang J, Sim K, Lee J. Validated five-factor model of positive and negative syndrome scale for schizophrenia in Chinese population. Schizophr Res. 2013;143(1):38–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2012.10.019.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Addington D, Addington J, Schissel B. A depression rating scale for schizophrenics. Schizophr Res. 1990;3(4):247–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/0920-9964(90)90005-R.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Lako IM, Bruggeman R, Knegtering H, Wiersma D, Schoevers RA, Slooff CJ, et al. A systematic review of instruments to measure depressive symptoms in patients with schizophrenia. J Affect Disord. 2012;140(1):38–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2011.10.014.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Schennach R, Obermeier M, Seemüller F, Jäger M, Schmauss M, Laux G, et al. Evaluating depressive symptoms in schizophrenia: a psychometric comparison of the Calgary depression scale for schizophrenia and the Hamilton depression rating scale. Psychopathology. 2012;45(5):276–85. https://doi.org/10.1159/000336729.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Nasrallah H, Morosini P, Gagnon DD. Reliability, validity and ability to detect change of the personal and social performance scale in patients with stable schizophrenia. Psychiatry Res. 2008;161:213–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2007.11.012.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kawata AK, Revicki DA. Psychometric properties of the personal and social performance scale (PSP) among individuals with schizophrenia living in the community. Quality of Life Research: An International Journal of Quality of Life Aspects of Treatment, Care & Rehabilitation. 2008;17(10):1247–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-008-9400-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Herth K. Abbreviated instrument to measure hope: development and psychometric evaluation. J Adv Nurs. 1992;17(10):1251–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.1992.tb01843.x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Boyd JE, Otilingam PG, DeForge BR. Brief version of the internalized stigma of mental illness (ISMI) scale: psychometric properties and relationship to depression, self esteem, recovery orientation, empowerment, and perceived devaluation and discrimination. Psychiatr Rehabil J. 2014;37(1):17–23. https://doi.org/10.1037/prj0000035.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Rogers ES, Chamberlin J, Ellison ML, Crean T. A consumer-constructed scale to measure empowerment among users of mental health services. Psychiatr Serv. 1997;48(8):1042–7. https://doi.org/10.1176/ps.48.8.1042.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Wowra SA, McCarter R. Validation of the empowerment scale with an outpatient mental health population. Psychiatr Serv. 1999;50(7):959–61. https://doi.org/10.1176/ps.50.7.959.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Organization WH. WHOQOL-BREF introduction. Scoring and Generic Version of the Assessment: Administration; 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Skevington SM, Lotfy M, O'Connell KA. The World Health Organization's WHOQOL-BREF quality of life assessment: psychometric properties and results of the international field trial. A report from the WHOQOL group. Qual Life Res Int J Qual Life Asp Treat Care Rehab. 2004;13(2):299–310.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates; 1988.

  30. Costello A. B, Osborne J. W. Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. In: Boyle G. J, O'Gorman J. G, Fogarty G. J, . Work and organisational psychology: Research methodology; Assessment and selection; Organisational change and development; Human resource and performance management; Emerging trends: Innovation/globalisation/technology., Vols. 1–5. Sage benchmarks in psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc; 2016. p. 125–36.

  31. Bird V, Leamy M, Tew J, Le Boutillier C, Williams J, Slade M. Fit for purpose? Validation of a conceptual framework for personal recovery with current mental health consumers. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2014;48(7):644–53. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004867413520046.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Ye S, Pan JY, Wong DFK, Bola JR. Cross-validation of mental health recovery measures in a Hong Kong Chinese sample. Res Soc Work Pract. 2013;23(3):311–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731512471861.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Dr. JL was supported by the National Healthcare Group’s Clinician Scientist Career Scheme (Grant No.: NHG- CSCS/15007).

Funding

This study was funded by the Singapore Ministry of Health’s National Medical Research Council under the Centre Grant Programme (Grant No.: NMRC/CG/004/2013). The funders had no role in the design and conduct of the study, or in the analysis and interpretation of study data and in writing the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Research Division, Institute of Mental Health, Buangkok Green Medical Park, 10 Buangkok View, Singapore, Singapore

    Madeline Lim & Jimmy Lee

  2. Department of Nursing, Institute of Mental Health, Buangkok Green Medical Park, 10 Buangkok View, Singapore, Singapore

    Huiting Xie & Ziqiang Li

  3. Department of Occupational Therapy, Institute of Mental Health, Buangkok Green Medical Park, 10 Buangkok View, Singapore, Singapore

    Bhing Leet Tan

  4. Singapore Institute of Technology, 10 Dover Drive, Singapore, Singapore

    Bhing Leet Tan

  5. Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, 11 Mandalay Road, Singapore, Singapore

    Jimmy Lee

  6. Department of Psychosis, Institute of Mental Health, Buangkok Green Medical Park, 10 Buangkok View, Singapore, Singapore

    Jimmy Lee

Authors
  1. Madeline Lim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Huiting Xie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ziqiang Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Bhing Leet Tan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jimmy Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation and data collection were performed by ML, HX and ZL. Analysis were performed by ML and JL. The first draft of the manuscript was written by ML and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jimmy Lee.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee (National Healthcare Group’s Domain Specific Review Board, DSRB 2016/00179) and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lim, M., Xie, H., Li, Z. et al. Using the CHIME Personal Recovery Framework to Evaluate the Validity of the MHRM-10 in Individuals with Psychosis. Psychiatr Q 91, 793–805 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11126-020-09737-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11126-020-09737-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation