Cargando…
Measuring personal recovery in a low-intensity community mental healthcare setting: validation of the Dutch version of the individual recovery outcomes counter (I.ROC)
BACKGROUND: Measuring progress in treatment is essential for systematic evaluation by service users and their care providers. In low-intensity community mental healthcare, a questionnaire to measure progress in treatment should be aimed at personal recovery and should require little effort to comple...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8759275/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35031001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12888-022-03697-6 |
_version_ | 1784633076995850240 |
---|---|
author | Beckers, Thijs Koekkoek, Bauke Hutschemaekers, Giel Rudd, Bridey Tiemens, Bea |
author_facet | Beckers, Thijs Koekkoek, Bauke Hutschemaekers, Giel Rudd, Bridey Tiemens, Bea |
author_sort | Beckers, Thijs |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Measuring progress in treatment is essential for systematic evaluation by service users and their care providers. In low-intensity community mental healthcare, a questionnaire to measure progress in treatment should be aimed at personal recovery and should require little effort to complete. METHODS: The Individual Recovery Outcome Counter (I.ROC) was translated from English into Dutch, and psychometric evaluations were performed. Data were collected on personal recovery (Recovery Assessment Scale), quality of life (Manchester Short Assessment of Quality of Life), and symptoms of mental illness and social functioning (Outcome Questionnaire, OQ-45) for assessing the validity of the I.ROC. Test–retest reliability was evaluated by calculating the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient and internal consistency was evaluated by calculating Cronbach’s alpha. Exploratory factor analysis was performed to determine construct validity. To assess convergent validity, the I.ROC was compared to relevant questionnaires by calculating Pearson correlation coefficients. To evaluate discriminant validity, I.ROC scores of certain subgroups were compared using either a t-test or analysis of variance. RESULTS: There were 764 participants in this study who mostly completed more than one I.ROC (total n = 2,863). The I.ROC aimed to measure the concept of personal recovery as a whole, which was confirmed by a factor analysis. The test–retest reliability was satisfactory (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient is 0.856), as were the internal consistency (Cronbachs Alpha is 0.921) and the convergent validity. Sensitivity to change was small, but comparable to that of the OQ-45. CONCLUSIONS: The Dutch version of the I.ROC appears to have satisfactory psychometric properties to warrant its use in daily practice. Discriminant validity and sensitivity to change need further research. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8759275 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-87592752022-01-18 Measuring personal recovery in a low-intensity community mental healthcare setting: validation of the Dutch version of the individual recovery outcomes counter (I.ROC) Beckers, Thijs Koekkoek, Bauke Hutschemaekers, Giel Rudd, Bridey Tiemens, Bea BMC Psychiatry Research BACKGROUND: Measuring progress in treatment is essential for systematic evaluation by service users and their care providers. In low-intensity community mental healthcare, a questionnaire to measure progress in treatment should be aimed at personal recovery and should require little effort to complete. METHODS: The Individual Recovery Outcome Counter (I.ROC) was translated from English into Dutch, and psychometric evaluations were performed. Data were collected on personal recovery (Recovery Assessment Scale), quality of life (Manchester Short Assessment of Quality of Life), and symptoms of mental illness and social functioning (Outcome Questionnaire, OQ-45) for assessing the validity of the I.ROC. Test–retest reliability was evaluated by calculating the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient and internal consistency was evaluated by calculating Cronbach’s alpha. Exploratory factor analysis was performed to determine construct validity. To assess convergent validity, the I.ROC was compared to relevant questionnaires by calculating Pearson correlation coefficients. To evaluate discriminant validity, I.ROC scores of certain subgroups were compared using either a t-test or analysis of variance. RESULTS: There were 764 participants in this study who mostly completed more than one I.ROC (total n = 2,863). The I.ROC aimed to measure the concept of personal recovery as a whole, which was confirmed by a factor analysis. The test–retest reliability was satisfactory (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient is 0.856), as were the internal consistency (Cronbachs Alpha is 0.921) and the convergent validity. Sensitivity to change was small, but comparable to that of the OQ-45. CONCLUSIONS: The Dutch version of the I.ROC appears to have satisfactory psychometric properties to warrant its use in daily practice. Discriminant validity and sensitivity to change need further research. BioMed Central 2022-01-14 /pmc/articles/PMC8759275/ /pubmed/35031001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12888-022-03697-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Beckers, Thijs Koekkoek, Bauke Hutschemaekers, Giel Rudd, Bridey Tiemens, Bea Measuring personal recovery in a low-intensity community mental healthcare setting: validation of the Dutch version of the individual recovery outcomes counter (I.ROC) |
title | Measuring personal recovery in a low-intensity community mental healthcare setting: validation of the Dutch version of the individual recovery outcomes counter (I.ROC) |
title_full | Measuring personal recovery in a low-intensity community mental healthcare setting: validation of the Dutch version of the individual recovery outcomes counter (I.ROC) |
title_fullStr | Measuring personal recovery in a low-intensity community mental healthcare setting: validation of the Dutch version of the individual recovery outcomes counter (I.ROC) |
title_full_unstemmed | Measuring personal recovery in a low-intensity community mental healthcare setting: validation of the Dutch version of the individual recovery outcomes counter (I.ROC) |
title_short | Measuring personal recovery in a low-intensity community mental healthcare setting: validation of the Dutch version of the individual recovery outcomes counter (I.ROC) |
title_sort | measuring personal recovery in a low-intensity community mental healthcare setting: validation of the dutch version of the individual recovery outcomes counter (i.roc) |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8759275/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35031001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12888-022-03697-6 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT beckersthijs measuringpersonalrecoveryinalowintensitycommunitymentalhealthcaresettingvalidationofthedutchversionoftheindividualrecoveryoutcomescounteriroc AT koekkoekbauke measuringpersonalrecoveryinalowintensitycommunitymentalhealthcaresettingvalidationofthedutchversionoftheindividualrecoveryoutcomescounteriroc AT hutschemaekersgiel measuringpersonalrecoveryinalowintensitycommunitymentalhealthcaresettingvalidationofthedutchversionoftheindividualrecoveryoutcomescounteriroc AT ruddbridey measuringpersonalrecoveryinalowintensitycommunitymentalhealthcaresettingvalidationofthedutchversionoftheindividualrecoveryoutcomescounteriroc AT tiemensbea measuringpersonalrecoveryinalowintensitycommunitymentalhealthcaresettingvalidationofthedutchversionoftheindividualrecoveryoutcomescounteriroc |