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
  • [21] The Neighborhood Environments of Mutual-Help Recovery Houses: Comparisons by Perceived Socioeconomic Status
    Ferrari, Joseph R.
    Groh, David R.
    Jason, Leonard A.
    JOURNAL OF GROUPS IN ADDICTION & RECOVERY, 2009, 4 (1-2) : 100 - 109
  • [22] Mutual-Help Groups for Dually Diagnosed Individuals: Rationale, Description, and Review of the Evidence
    Kelly, John F.
    Yeterian, Julie D.
    JOURNAL OF GROUPS IN ADDICTION & RECOVERY, 2008, 3 (3-4) : 217 - 242
  • [23] Some recovery processes in mutual-help groups for persons with mental illness; I: Qualitative analysis of program materials and testimonies
    Corrigan, PW
    Calabrese, JD
    Diwan, SE
    Keogh, CB
    Keck, L
    Mussey, C
    COMMUNITY MENTAL HEALTH JOURNAL, 2002, 38 (04) : 287 - 301
  • [24] Some Recovery Processes in Mutual-Help Groups for Persons with Mental Illness; I: Qualitative Analysis of Program Materials and Testimonies
    Patrick W. Corrigan
    Joseph D. Calabrese
    Sarah E. Diwan
    Cornelius B. Keogh
    Lorraine Keck
    Carol Mussey
    Community Mental Health Journal, 2002, 38 : 287 - 301
  • [25] Engagement and Disengagement in Mutual-Help Addiction Recovery Housing: A Test of Affective Events Theory
    Beasley, Christopher R.
    Jason, Leonard A.
    JOURNAL OF PLANNING LITERATURE, 2024, 39 (03) : 482 - 482
  • [26] Engagement and Disengagement in Mutual-Help Addiction Recovery Housing: A Test of Affective Events Theory
    Beasley, Christopher R.
    Jason, Leonard A.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY PSYCHOLOGY, 2015, 55 (3-4) : 347 - 358
  • [27] Intensive Referral of Veterans to Mutual-Help Groups: A Mixed-Methods Implementation Evaluation
    Young, Lance Brendan
    Grant, Kathleen M.
    Pulido, R. Dario
    Simpson, Jamie L.
    Tyler, Kimberly A.
    Timko, Christine
    ALCOHOLISM TREATMENT QUARTERLY, 2018, 36 (02) : 179 - 201
  • [28] Intensive referral to 12-step dual-focused mutual-help groups
    Timko, Christine
    Sutkowi, Anne
    Cronkite, Ruth C.
    Makin-Byrd, Kerry
    Moos, Rudolf H.
    DRUG AND ALCOHOL DEPENDENCE, 2011, 118 (2-3) : 194 - 201
  • [29] Who participates in the 'Celebrate Recovery' mutual-help organization? Results from a National US Investigation
    Dankwah, Akosua B.
    Hoeppner, Bettina B.
    Bergman, Brandon G.
    Kelly, John F.
    DRUG AND ALCOHOL DEPENDENCE, 2025, 267
  • [30] Counteracting "not in my backyard": The positive effects of greater occupancy within mutual-help recovery homes
    Jason, Leonard A.
    Groh, David R.
    Durocher, Megan
    Alvarez, Josefino
    Aose, Darrin M.
    Ferrari, Joseph R.
    JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY PSYCHOLOGY, 2008, 36 (07) : 947 - 958