Louise Canacott1, Nima Moghaddam2, Anna Tickle1. 1. University of Nottingham. 2. Trent Doctorate of Clinical Psychology, School of Psychology, University of Lincoln.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The Wellness Recovery Action Plan (WRAP) is a structured approach to illness self-management that is widely used within mental health services. This systematic review identifies, appraises, and meta-analyzes quantitative evidence from experimental or quasi-experimental comparison group designs for effects of WRAP on measures reflecting personal recovery and clinical symptomatology. METHOD: A systematic strategy was used to search 6 electronic reference databases (Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, The Cochrane Library) using full-text, keywords, and Medical Subject Headings (MeSh)/Thesaurus headings terms. Unpublished research was identified using the same strategy in the EThOS database. Controlled trials of WRAP were selected and assessed for quality. Meta-analyses were applied to quantitative data to establish the effects of WRAP on outcomes of interest. RESULTS: Of 253 studies initially identified, 5 quantitative studies (reported in 6 papers) reporting controlled trials were included in the review. Meta-analyses revealed that, relative to inactive control conditions, WRAP was (a) superior for promoting self-perceived recovery outcomes (demonstrating a small-but-significant pooled effect), but (b) not superior for reducing clinical symptomatology-although restriction to randomized-controlled trials revealed 1 small effect favoring WRAP for reducing depression. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Participation in WRAP has positive outcomes for participants, quantifiable using comprehensive measures of self-perceived recovery. Improvements were not sustained over time. Future research could explore this, as well as potential effects of follow-up WRAP sessions. The results support a move to broader measurement of outcomes within mental health, away from a reliance on clinical outcome measures. Recommendations for further research are made. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
OBJECTIVE: The Wellness Recovery Action Plan (WRAP) is a structured approach to illness self-management that is widely used within mental health services. This systematic review identifies, appraises, and meta-analyzes quantitative evidence from experimental or quasi-experimental comparison group designs for effects of WRAP on measures reflecting personal recovery and clinical symptomatology. METHOD: A systematic strategy was used to search 6 electronic reference databases (Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, The Cochrane Library) using full-text, keywords, and Medical Subject Headings (MeSh)/Thesaurus headings terms. Unpublished research was identified using the same strategy in the EThOS database. Controlled trials of WRAP were selected and assessed for quality. Meta-analyses were applied to quantitative data to establish the effects of WRAP on outcomes of interest. RESULTS: Of 253 studies initially identified, 5 quantitative studies (reported in 6 papers) reporting controlled trials were included in the review. Meta-analyses revealed that, relative to inactive control conditions, WRAP was (a) superior for promoting self-perceived recovery outcomes (demonstrating a small-but-significant pooled effect), but (b) not superior for reducing clinical symptomatology-although restriction to randomized-controlled trials revealed 1 small effect favoring WRAP for reducing depression. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Participation in WRAP has positive outcomes for participants, quantifiable using comprehensive measures of self-perceived recovery. Improvements were not sustained over time. Future research could explore this, as well as potential effects of follow-up WRAP sessions. The results support a move to broader measurement of outcomes within mental health, away from a reliance on clinical outcome measures. Recommendations for further research are made. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
Authors: Bert-Jan Roosenschoon; Jaap van Weeghel; Mathijs L Deen; Emmie W van Esveld; Astrid M Kamperman; Cornelis L Mulder Journal: Front Psychiatry Date: 2021-12-14 Impact factor: 4.157
Authors: Myra Piat; Megan Wainwright; Marie-Pier Rivest; Eleni Sofouli; Tristan von Kirchenheim; Hélène Albert; Regina Casey; Lise Labonté; Joseph J O'Rourke; Sébastien LeBlanc Journal: Int J Ment Health Syst Date: 2022-10-09