A pilot study of the Moving On In My Recovery program for people in recovery from substance use.

Background: This study pilot tested Moving On In My Recovery (MOIMR), a 12-session, acceptance-based, cognitive-behavioral, manual-guided group program for individuals in recovery from substance use. MOIMR aims to bridge the gap between formal treatment and sustained recovery. Method: Participants were 61 people in recovery from substance use and in the catchment area of the Betsi Cadwaladr Health Board, North Wales, United Kingdom. Using a variety of questionnaires, participants' psychological flexibility and wellbeing were assessed at baseline, post-treatment, and a three-month follow-up. Participants who dropped out were contacted at the follow-up and interviewed about their experience. Results: The study successfully recruited participants from real-world treatment services. During the study, significant improvements were observed in participants' social functioning, experiential avoidance, recovery capital, low mood, and anxiety. The proportion of participants who achieved abstinence also improved. Qualitative feedback confirmed the benefits that participants derived from attending the MOIMR groups. Conclusion: The program offered significant benefits for the participants despite many of them having apprehensions about undertaking a group-based approach. The gains established by quantitative analysis appeared to be supported by the qualitative findings. These findings suggest that a full randomized controlled trial of MOIMR would be feasible.

The Mental Health Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic Second Wave on Shielders and Their Family Members.

In March 2020, individuals shielding from coronavirus reported high rates of distress. This study investigated whether fear of contamination (FoC) and use of government-recommended behaviours (GRB; e.g., handwashing and wearing masks) were associated with psychological distress during February 2021. An online cross-sectional questionnaire assessed psychological distress in three groups (shielding self, shielding other/s, and control), and those shielding others also completed an adapted measure of health anxiety (α = 0.94). The sample (N = 723) was predominantly female (84%) with a mean age of 41.72 (SD = 15.15). Those shielding (self) demonstrated significantly higher rates of health anxiety and FoC in comparison to other groups (p < 0.001). The use of GRB was significantly lower in controls (p < 0.001), with no significant difference between the two shielding groups (p = 0.753). Rates of anxiety were higher when compared to March 2020 findings, except for controls. Hierarchical regressions indicated FoC and GRB accounted for 24% of variance in generalised anxiety (p < 0.001) and 28% in health anxiety, however, the latter was a non-significant predictor in final models. Those shielding themselves and others during the pandemic have experienced sustained levels of distress; special consideration must be given to those indirectly affected. Psychological interventions should account for realistic FoC and the impact of government-recommended health behaviours, as these factors are associated with distress in vulnerable groups and may extend beyond the pandemic. Future research should focus on longitudinal designs to monitor and better understand the clinical needs of those shielding, and those shielding others post-pandemic.

Trainee life under COVID-19: A systemic case report.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had implications for all of us. For those of us studying on clinical psychology doctorates, and similar psychotherapeutic training courses, this pandemic has led to some particular challenges. This article explores the experiences of a group of clinical psychology trainees, who are also completing intermediate systemic qualification, during the COVID-19 pandemic using a systemic case study approach. We consider the challenges we faced in relation to systemic theory and the intervention we would have used if we were clients in a family therapy clinic. This enabled us to reflect on the importance of self-reflexivity and self-care during these challenging times. Practitioner points: Using systemic thinking and ideas can help organisations make sense of how the system has had to adapt to working during a pandemic and can bring to light some of the challenges.During the pandemic and at other times of crisis, opportunities for students and staff to reflect together are likely to be beneficial.When working independently, as necessitated by the pandemic, finding ways to remain connected to our colleagues will be especially important.Providing opportunities for individuals to give feedback regarding their experiences and to influence organisational change will help individuals gain a sense of agency during a time when they are likely otherwise to feel disempowered.

Identifying the Main Components of Substance-Related Addiction Recovery Groups.

OBJECTIVES: Mutual-aid groups are a central part of many individuals' recovery journeys from substance addiction, and this research aimed to identify the key ingredients of a diverse range of recovery groups. METHODS: Individuals from 30 different substance addiction recovery groups across the UK (N = 151, 66% male, M age = 42.5 years) completed a survey, which asked participants to provide a narrative about their recovery group experiences. Participants were also asked to rate the extent to which theorized ingredients of addiction recovery groups were offered by their group, and how important each was to them. Both qualitative and quantitative data were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: The results indicated that the recovery group components suggested in previous literature were both present and rated as important. Component ratings did not differ depending on the type of group, the length of time the person had been in recovery, nor the length of time they had been involved in the group. The qualitative results identified other important components of recovery groups that had not been identified in the previous literature: presence of like-minded individuals and developing self-awareness and reflection skills. An updated list of recovery group components was thereby created. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the findings provide an in-depth, person-focused perspective on what makes an addiction recovery group successful. Asking group members directly about their experiences allowed us to refine and expand on previously theorized components. The updated components can be used as a template for developing future mutual-aid groups.

Coping and tolerance of uncertainty: Predictors and mediators of mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The current pandemic wave of COVID-19 has resulted in significant uncertainty for the general public. Mental health and examining factors that may influence distress have been outlined as key research priorities to inform interventions. This research sought to examine whether intolerance of uncertainty and coping responses influence the degree of distress experienced by the U.K. general public during the COVID-19 pandemic. Using a cross-sectional online questionnaire design, participants were recruited (N = 842) using snowball sampling over a 10-day period in the early "lockdown" phase of the pandemic. Around a quarter of participants demonstrated significantly elevated anxiety and depression, with 14.8% reaching clinical cutoff for health anxiety. A one-way multivariate analysis of variance indicated those in "vulnerable" groups were significantly more anxious (p < .001), and also more anxious in relation to their health (p < .001). Mediation modeling demonstrated maladaptive coping responses partially mediated the predictive relationship between intolerance of uncertainty and psychological distress. Mental health difficulties have become significantly raised during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom, particularly for the vulnerable. Findings support emerging research suggesting the general public is struggling with uncertainty, more so than normal. Vulnerable groups are more anxious about their health, but not more intolerant of uncertainty than the nonvulnerable. Finally, this study indicated two modifiable factors that could act as treatment targets when adapting interventions for mental health during the COVID-19 global health crisis. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Practical impressions of interpretative phenomenological analysis from the novice's standpoint.

BACKGROUND: Interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) is an approach to qualitative analysis that has increasingly been used in health and psychology over the past 10-15 years. AIM: To address the practical impressions of applying IPA, from the perspective of novice researchers. DISCUSSION: The authors have observed two areas to which they would like to draw novice researchers' attention: interpretations of the six steps of IPA and what 'interpretation' means in IPA. They provide tentative suggestions in these areas for supporting researchers new to IPA. CONCLUSION: More transparency in analysis when publishing work, alongside the introduction of interpretation as the 'seventh' step of IPA, may increase the quality of IPA research and help new researchers to understand the approach better.

The Recovery Strengths Questionnaire for alcohol and drug use disorders.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: The Recovery Strengths Questionnaire (RSQ) is a 15-item self-report questionnaire that assesses an addicted individual's recovery strengths. This study aimed to validate the RSQ as a measure of recovery capital. DESIGN AND METHODS: As part of a larger study, 151 participants in addiction recovery groups from across the UK completed the RSQ. Participants also completed the Assessment of Recovery Capital questionnaire and provided some demographic information. RESULTS: The RSQ was found to be psychometrically sound, with high internal consistency and concurrent validity with the Assessment of Recovery Capital. RSQ scores were positively correlated with length of time in recovery and length of membership in recovery groups, and the scores could be used to discriminate between those in early and late recovery. Principal components analysis revealed a two-factor structure of recovery capital. These two factors were named 'within-group recovery strengths' and 'externally generated recovery strengths', and it was found that only the within-group factor scale (i.e. resources developed within recovery groups) predicted length of time in recovery and recovery groups. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: These results highlight the important role that recovery groups can play in an individual's recovery, and they provide an alternative factor structure to the one-factor structure of the Assessment of Recovery Capital.

Negative attentional bias for positive recovery-related words as a predictor of treatment success among individuals with an alcohol use disorder.

INTRODUCTION: This study assessed relationships between clients' attentional bias (AB) for different types of stimuli and their treatment outcomes. Alcohol AB during detoxification has previously been shown to predict relapse, but further research was needed to clarify this relationship. The current study determined whether AB for recovery-related words would also predict treatment outcome. METHODS: Participants were 45 clients undergoing alcohol detoxification, and a control group of 36 staff members. They rated words for personal relevance in four categories (alcohol-related, neutral, positive change-related, and negative change-related). Participants completed an individualized Stroop task containing their chosen words. They were also assessed on readiness-to-change, difficulties with emotion regulation, drinking problems, anxiety, and depression. Clients were interviewed at a three-month follow-up to determine their treatment outcome. RESULTS: As predicted, questionnaire measures did not predict clients' treatment outcome (p > .05). A logistic regression model indicated that the best predictor of treatment outcome was AB for positive change-related words (p = .048), with successful individuals having less AB for these words than for the other word categories. Although this finding was unexpected, it was supported by significant relationships between positive change-related interference scores and continuous measures of drinking at follow-up [i.e. number of units drunk (p = .039) and number of drinking days (p = .018)]. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that positive change-related words are a better predictor of treatment outcome than are either alcohol-related words or negative change-related words.