OBJECTIVE: There is considerable interest in the concept of recovery from psychosis. Consumers describe recovery as a process as opposed to a clinical outcome. However, measures of recovery have an important role in the development of recovery-based mental health services. This study sought to investigate the validity and reliability of the Stages of Recovery Instrument (STORI) (Andresen et al., 2006). This is an Australian instrument chosen as a promising measure of recovery developed from the perspectives of consumer accounts. METHOD: A questionnaire design was used to investigate the following aspects of validity: face validity and feasibility; concurrent validity; construct validity; and test-retest reliability. Fifty (50) people from the caseloads of three specialist mental health teams in a London borough completed the STORI, the Recovery Assessment Scale (RAS) (Corrigan et al., 1999) and a feedback questionnaire. Twenty two (22) people completed the STORI a second time for the purposes of test-retest reliability exploration. RESULTS: Participants' responses to the feedback questionnaire were mainly positive. This was seen as evidence of face validity and feasibility. Correlations between the STORI and the RAS provided evidence of concurrent validity. Cluster analysis revealed that the STORI items formed three clusters rather than five. Strong correlations between the first and second STORI administrations provided initial evidence for the test-retest reliability. CONCLUSIONS: The STORI can be used to measure recovery concepts in the UK. However, it does not measure the five-stage model on which it was based. A three-stage model of recovery might best form the basis of future recovery research.
OBJECTIVE: There is considerable interest in the concept of recovery from psychosis. Consumers describe recovery as a process as opposed to a clinical outcome. However, measures of recovery have an important role in the development of recovery-based mental health services. This study sought to investigate the validity and reliability of the Stages of Recovery Instrument (STORI) (Andresen et al., 2006). This is an Australian instrument chosen as a promising measure of recovery developed from the perspectives of consumer accounts. METHOD: A questionnaire design was used to investigate the following aspects of validity: face validity and feasibility; concurrent validity; construct validity; and test-retest reliability. Fifty (50) people from the caseloads of three specialist mental health teams in a London borough completed the STORI, the Recovery Assessment Scale (RAS) (Corrigan et al., 1999) and a feedback questionnaire. Twenty two (22) people completed the STORI a second time for the purposes of test-retest reliability exploration. RESULTS:Participants' responses to the feedback questionnaire were mainly positive. This was seen as evidence of face validity and feasibility. Correlations between the STORI and the RAS provided evidence of concurrent validity. Cluster analysis revealed that the STORI items formed three clusters rather than five. Strong correlations between the first and second STORI administrations provided initial evidence for the test-retest reliability. CONCLUSIONS: The STORI can be used to measure recovery concepts in the UK. However, it does not measure the five-stage model on which it was based. A three-stage model of recovery might best form the basis of future recovery research.
Authors: Stefan Rennick-Egglestone; Rachel Elliott; Melanie Smuk; Clare Robinson; Sylvia Bailey; Roger Smith; Jeroen Keppens; Hannah Hussain; Kristian Pollock; Pim Cuijpers; Joy Llewellyn-Beardsley; Fiona Ng; Caroline Yeo; James Roe; Ada Hui; Lian van der Krieke; Rianna Walcott; Mike Slade Journal: Trials Date: 2020-07-20 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Jessica Marian Goodman-Casanova; Daniel Cuesta-Lozano; Marta Garcia-Gallardo; Francisco Javier Duran-Jimenez; Fermin Mayoral-Cleries; Jose Guzman-Parra Journal: Int J Ment Health Nurs Date: 2022-03-11 Impact factor: 5.100