Measuring recovery capital for people recovering from alcohol and drug addiction:A systematic review

Background: Recovery capital (RC) theory provides a biopsychosocial framework for identifying and measuring strengths and barriers that can be targeted to support recovery from alcohol and drug addiction. This systematic review analyzed and synthesized all quantitative approaches that have been used to measured recovery capital RC in the recent literaturesince 2016.Method: Systematic database searches were conducted in three databases to identifyThe reviewed studies were published from 2016 to 2023, . Eligible studiesand explicitly stated they measured RC recovery capital in participants recovering from alcohol and/or drug addiction. Studies focusing on other forms of addiction were excluded.Results: Sixty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Forty-six studies (66.7%) used one of the ten identified RC recovery capital questionnaires, and twenty-five studies (36.2%) used a measurement approach other than one of the ten RC recovery capital questionnaires. The ten RC recovery capital questionnaires are primarily developed for adult populations across clinical and community recovery settings, and between them measuredwere identified to measure altogether 41 separate RC recovery capital constructs. They, and are generally considered valid and reliable measures of RCrecovery capital. Nevertheless, a strong evidence base on the psychometric properties across diverse populations and settings is still needs to be established for all RC these questionnaires. Conclusion: The development of RC recovery capital questionnaires has been a significant advance in the addiction recovery field, in alignment with the modern emerging recovery-oriented approach to addiction recovery care. Additionally, the non-RC recovery capital questionnaire-based approaches to RC recovery capital measurement have an important place in the field. They could be used alongside RC recovery capital questionnaires to test RC theory, and in contexts where the application of the RC questionnaires is not feasible, such as analyses of data from online recovery forums

Modeling Recovery Housing Retention and Program Outcomes by Justice Involvement among Residents in Virginia, USA:An Observational Study

Living in recovery housing can improve addiction recovery and desistance outcomes. This study examined whether retention in recovery housing and types of discharge outcomes (completed, “neutral,” and “negative” outcomes) differed for clients with recent criminal legal system (CLS) involvement. Using data from 101 recovery residences certified by the Virginia Association of Recovery Residences based on 1,978 individuals completing the REC-CAP assessment, competing risk analyses (cumulative incidence function, restricted mean survival time, and restricted mean time lost) followed by the marginalization of effects were implemented to examine program outcomes at final discharge. Residents with recent CLS involvement were more likely to be discharged for positive reasons (successful completion of their goals) and premature/negative reasons (e.g., disciplinary releases) than for neutral reasons. Findings indicate that retention for 6–18 months is essential to establish and maintain positive discharge outcomes, and interventions should be developed to enhance retention in recovery residents with recent justice involvement.</p

Measuring recovery capital for people recovering from alcohol and drug addiction: a systematic review

Recovery capital theory provides a biopsychosocial framework for identifying and measuring strengths and barriers that can be targeted to support recovery from alcohol and drug addiction. This systematic review analyzed and synthesized all quantitative approaches that have measured recovery capital since 2016. Three databases were searched to identify studies published from 2016 to 2023. Eligible studies explicitly stated they measured recovery capital in participants recovering from alcohol and/or drug addiction. Studies focusing on other forms of addiction were excluded. Sixty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Forty-six studies used one of the ten identified recovery capital questionnaires, and twenty-five studies used a measurement approach other than one of the ten recovery capital questionnaires. The ten recovery capital questionnaires are primarily developed for adult populations across clinical and community recovery settings, and between them measure 41 separate recovery capital constructs. They are generally considered valid and reliable measures of recovery capital. Nevertheless, a strong evidence base on the psychometric properties across diverse populations and settings still needs to be established for these questionnaires. The development of recovery capital questionnaires has been a significant advance in the field of addiction recovery, in alignment with the emerging recovery-oriented approach to addiction recovery care. Additionally, the non-recovery capital questionnaire-based approaches to recovery capital measurement have an important place in the field. They could be used alongside recovery capital questionnaires to test theory, and in contexts where the application of the questionnaires is not feasible, such as analyses of data from online recovery forums.</p