The benefits and challenges of virtual SMART recovery mutual-help groups: Participant and facilitator perspectives

被引:3
|
作者
Beck, Alison K. [1 ]
Waks, Shifra [2 ]
Argent, Angela [3 ]
Deane, Frank P. [1 ]
Larance, Briony [1 ]
Manning, Victoria [4 ]
Baker, Amanda L. [5 ]
Hides, Leanne [6 ]
Kelly, Peter J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Wollongong, Fac Arts Social Sci & Humanities, Sch Psychol, Wollongong, NSW, Australia
[2] Univ Sydney, Discipline Occupat Therapy, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[3] SMART Recovery Australia, Pyrmont, NSW, Australia
[4] Monash Univ, Fac Med Nursing & Hlth Sci, Eastern Hlth Clin Sch, Clayton, Vic, Australia
[5] Univ Newcastle, Fac Hlth & Med, Sch Med & Publ Hlth, Callaghan, NSW, Australia
[6] Univ Queensland, Ctr Youth Subst Abuse Res, Sch Psychol, Lives Lived Well Grp, Brisbane, Qld, Australia
关键词
SMART recovery; Mutual-help; Digital recovery support services; Substance use disorders; Lived experience; Videoconference meetings; USE DISORDERS; ENGAGEMENT; EFFICACY; COVID-19; THERAPY; ALCOHOL;
D O I
10.1016/j.drugpo.2023.104174
中图分类号
R194 [卫生标准、卫生检查、医药管理];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: COVID-19 prompted widespread transition of face-to-face mutual-help groups to virtual delivery. Current understanding of the experience of virtual mutual-help groups is limited to 12-step approaches or asynchronous groups (e.g., forums). This paper explores participant and facilitator perspectives regarding the benefits and challenges of accessing SMART Recovery mutual-help groups virtually via videoconference.Methods: A self-selected convenience sample of participants (n = 29) and facilitators (n = 15) from SMART Recovery mutual-help groups in Australia were enrolled. Participants and facilitators were sampled to reflect experience of virtual groups delivered via videoconference ('online'), face-to-face groups ('face-to-face') or both types of groups ('both'). Telephone qualitative interviews were conducted using a semi-structured interview guide. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analysed using iterative categorisation.Results: Participant and facilitators discussed their experience across eight interconnected themes benefits were typically discussed with regard to the (1) availability, (2) ease of access and (3) value add of the chat feature in online groups. Challenges largely pertained to (1) in-group engagement, (2) group size, (3) non-verbal cues, (4) social interaction and (5) technology problems. The impact of these challenges on participant and facilitator experience varied, and neither modality was consistently identified as superior. Conclusions: SMART Recovery mutual-help groups provided participants with another option for accessing mutual-help and appealed to different people under different circumstances. Depending on the needs and preferences of the individual, online SMART Recovery mutual-help groups may help to mitigate a range of barriers to help seeking and may also engage people otherwise unable or reluctant to engage in treatment. To inform training, practice and policy, improved understanding of the individual and contextual factors that enhance participant engagement, experience and outcomes is needed.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] BENEFITS OF MUTUAL-HELP GROUPS FOR DUALLY DIAGNOSED PATIENTS
    Lin, S. L.
    Hindash, A. Cowden
    Timko, C.
    ALCOHOLISM-CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH, 2012, 36 : 295A - 295A
  • [2] Some recovery processes in mutual-help groups,for persons with mental illness; II: Qualitative analysis of participant interviews
    Corrigan, PW
    Slopen, N
    Gracia, G
    Phelan, S
    Keogh, CB
    Keck, L
    COMMUNITY MENTAL HEALTH JOURNAL, 2005, 41 (06) : 721 - 735
  • [3] Some Recovery Processes in Mutual-Help Groups for Persons with Mental Illness; II: Qualitative Analysis of Participant Interviews
    Patrick W. Corrigan
    Natalie Slopen
    Gabriela Gracia
    Sean Phelan
    Cornelius B. Keogh
    Lorraine Keck
    Community Mental Health Journal, 2005, 41 : 721 - 735
  • [4] AN ASSESSMENT OF THE NEEDS OF MUTUAL-HELP GROUPS
    MEISSEN, GJ
    GLEASON, DF
    EMBREE, MG
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY PSYCHOLOGY, 1991, 19 (03) : 427 - 442
  • [5] From both sides: Participant and facilitator perceptions of SMART Recovery groups
    Kelly, Peter J.
    Raftery, Dayle
    Deane, Frank P.
    Baker, Amanda L.
    Hunt, David
    Shakeshaft, Anthony
    DRUG AND ALCOHOL REVIEW, 2017, 36 (03) : 325 - 332
  • [6] Dually diagnosed patients' benefits of mutual-help groups and the role of social anxiety
    Timko, Christine
    Cronkite, Ruth C.
    McKellar, John
    Zemore, Sarah
    Moos, Rudolf H.
    JOURNAL OF SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT, 2013, 44 (02) : 216 - 223
  • [7] WHOM DO MUTUAL-HELP GROUPS HELP - A TYPOLOGY OF MEMBERS
    YOUNG, J
    WILLIAMS, CL
    HOSPITAL AND COMMUNITY PSYCHIATRY, 1988, 39 (11): : 1178 - 1182
  • [8] Online SMART Recovery mutual-help groups: a comparison of the characteristics and experiences of men living in rural and urban regions of Australia
    van de Ven, Katinka
    Deane, Frank P.
    Kelly, Peter J.
    Larance, Briony
    Beck, Alison K.
    RURAL AND REMOTE HEALTH, 2024, 24 (03):
  • [9] Exploring the potential of Self-Management and Recovery Training (SMART Recovery) mutual-help groups for supporting people who use methamphetamine: A qualitative study examining participant experience of initiation and engagement
    Beck, Alison K.
    Larance, Briony
    Manning, Victoria
    Deane, Frank P.
    Baker, Amanda L.
    Hides, Leanne
    Shakeshaft, Anthony
    Argent, Angela
    Kelly, Peter J.
    JOURNAL OF SUBSTANCE USE & ADDICTION TREATMENT, 2025, 169
  • [10] The Role of Mutual-Help Groups in Extending the Framework of Treatment
    Kelly, John F.
    Yeterian, Julie D.
    ALCOHOL RESEARCH & HEALTH, 2011, 33 (04) : 350 - 355