We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.
A randomized trial of individual peer support for adults with psychiatric disabilities undergoing civil commitment.
Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal 2016 September
OBJECTIVE: Given the proliferation of peer-delivered services and its growing but insufficient empirical base, we undertook a randomized trial to examine the effects of such services on individuals with severe psychiatric disabilities undergoing a civil commitment.
METHOD: We recruited n = 113 individuals who were civilly committed for inpatient treatment. Randomly assigned experimental participants were paired with a trained peer specialist to receive intensive 1-on-1 support to assist them with both their recovery and the conditions of their mandated court-ordered services. Individuals in the control group were invited to receive other supportive, peer-delivered services, such as social and group educational activities, but excluding individual peer support. We assessed a variety of outcomes including social supports, quality of life, recovery, symptoms, and functioning.
RESULTS: Mounting a randomized trial in this setting and with participants who were court-ordered for inpatient treatment proved challenging in terms of recruitment, service provision, retention in the intervention, and attrition from the research. Intent-to-treat analyses revealed no significant differences in outcomes by study condition. As-treated analyses comparing high- and low-use peer support groups with control group participants found significant differences favoring peer support recipients in quality of life and functioning but no differences in other study outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Difficulties with ensuring the quality of the peer support in this study may be in part responsible for our failure to see more-definitive and -positive results. As the peer support specialist profession evolves, an understanding of its effective ingredients and mechanisms must be elucidated to allow for more-rigorous studies. (PsycINFO Database Record
METHOD: We recruited n = 113 individuals who were civilly committed for inpatient treatment. Randomly assigned experimental participants were paired with a trained peer specialist to receive intensive 1-on-1 support to assist them with both their recovery and the conditions of their mandated court-ordered services. Individuals in the control group were invited to receive other supportive, peer-delivered services, such as social and group educational activities, but excluding individual peer support. We assessed a variety of outcomes including social supports, quality of life, recovery, symptoms, and functioning.
RESULTS: Mounting a randomized trial in this setting and with participants who were court-ordered for inpatient treatment proved challenging in terms of recruitment, service provision, retention in the intervention, and attrition from the research. Intent-to-treat analyses revealed no significant differences in outcomes by study condition. As-treated analyses comparing high- and low-use peer support groups with control group participants found significant differences favoring peer support recipients in quality of life and functioning but no differences in other study outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Difficulties with ensuring the quality of the peer support in this study may be in part responsible for our failure to see more-definitive and -positive results. As the peer support specialist profession evolves, an understanding of its effective ingredients and mechanisms must be elucidated to allow for more-rigorous studies. (PsycINFO Database Record
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app