An analysis of the definitions and elements of recovery: A review of the literature.

Onken, Steven J.; Craig, Catherine; Ridgway, Priscilla; Ralph, Ruth O.; Cook, Judith Α.

doi:10.2975/31.1.2007.9.22

Cited by 407 publications

(416 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

393

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Self‐direction is a central element of the recovery model of mental healthcare wherein individuals direct their own goals, identify their preferred life paths, and determine which steps to take on that path (Onken, Craig, Ridgway, Ralph, & Cook, 2007). However, adaptive challenges to self‐direction in the care planning process have been identified, including: beliefs that recovery‐oriented practice is not unique or novel, that it is too burdensome for overextended clinicians, that it is not desired by individuals with severe mental illnesses, that it is not evidence‐based or reimbursable, that it devalues provider expertise, and that it is too risky because it increases provider exposure to incidents and liability (Stanhope et al, 2015).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Person‐directed care planning in nursing homes: A scoping review

Lepore

Scales

Anderson

et al. 2018

Int J Older People Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AimFederal regulations require nursing homes in the United States to support residents in directing their own care rather than having their care plans developed for them without their engagement, but knowledge of person‐directed approaches to care planning in nursing homes is limited. The purpose of this study was to advance understanding of person‐directed care planning (PDCP).MethodsA multidisciplinary research team conducted a scoping review on individual and family involvement in care planning, including literature from a variety of care contexts. Search results were systematically screened to identify literature that addressed individual or family involvement in care planning as a primary concern, and then analysed using thematic content analysis.ResultsSeveral themes were identified, including definitions of the concept of PDCP, essential elements of PDCP, barriers, facilitators and outcomes. The concept of PDCP is informed by multiple disciplines, including humanist philosophy, disability rights and end‐of‐life care. Essential elements of PDCP include knowing the person, integrating the person's goals in care planning and updating care plans as individuals’ needs or preferences change. Limited time for care planning in nursing homes hinders PDCP. Facilitators include regulatory mandates and humanist social trends. Outcomes of PDCP were found to be positive (e.g., increased independence), but were inconsistently assessed across studies.ConclusionThis study offers pragmatic information that can support PDCP within nursing homes and insights for policy reform that may more effectively support PDCP.Implications for practiceThese findings can be used to guide implementation of PDCP.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Person‐directed care planning in nursing homes: A scoping review

Lepore

Scales

Anderson

et al. 2018

Int J Older People Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the concept of personal recovery does not capture the importance of environmental factors such as access to privacy on a unit that feels safe and secure (Onken et al,2007). It is recommended that services focus on promoting recovery in an environment that optimally facilitates personal recovery both within and out with the in-patient unit including providing opportunities such as access to employment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The very low prevalence of Black and minority ethnic (BME) participants in our sample may limit transferability to areas with different prevalence rates. Although very few studies have looked at the experience of recovery in individuals from BME backgrounds, important differences were noted in a recent systematic review and narrative synthesis (Onken et al,2007).…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What in-patients want: a qualitative study of what's important to mental health service users in their recovery (Wayfinder Partnership)

Bredski

Forsyth

Mountain

et al. 2015

Mental Health Review Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to present a qualitative analysis of the facilitators of recovery in inpatient psychiatric rehabilitation from the service users' perspective. Design/methodology/approach: Interviews with 31 in-patients were coded and analysed thematically at an interpretive level using an inductive approach. Findings: The dominant themes identified were hope, agency, relationships and opportunity. Totally, 20 subthemes were identified. Agency was more important to men than women and agency, hope and relationships were all more important to detained patients. Research limitations/implications:Interview data were collected in writing rather than taped. The results may not be transferrable to patient populations with significantly different demographic or service factors. Practical implications: Services need to target interventions at the areas identified by service users as important in their recovery. The findings suggest both environmental and relational aspects of care that may optimise recovery. Services also need to be able to measure the quality of the care they provide. A brief, culturally valid and psychometrically assessed instrument for measuring the recovery orientation of services is required. Originality/value: As far as the authors are aware no qualitative work to date has examined the recovery experiences of psychiatric in-patient service users in order to understand what services require to do to enable recovery from their perspective. The conceptual framework identified in this paper can be used to develop a service user self-report measure of the recovery orientation of services.

show abstract

“…Bonney & Stickley (2008) identify that generally, there is no clear consensus regarding recovery and it therefore remains very much contested. Many authors state that there is not yet a definitive definition of recovery (Onken et al, 2007;Kogstad et al, 2011). The most commonly cited definition was developed by Anthony (1993), who was one of the intellectual founders of the recovery movement (Shepherd et al, 2008).…”

Section: Recovery From Schizophrenia: Developing Context Utilising Thmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The most commonly cited definition was developed by Anthony (1993), who was one of the intellectual founders of the recovery movement (Shepherd et al, 2008). 's attitudes, values, feelings, goals, skills (Anthony, 1993, p15) Recovery cannot be regarded as a new concept, when observing the consumer/survivor self-help movements and groups there is evidence of the concept of mental health recovery since the 1930s (Onken et al, 2007). The idea of recovery in schizophrenia has been 'cherished' by a small group on the fringe of the field of mental health for over 20 years (Roe & Davidson, 2008) and has emerged at the forefront of the recent policy agenda (Bonney & Stickley, 2008).…”

Section: Recovery From Schizophrenia: Developing Context Utilising Thmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recovery from schizophrenia: developing context utilising the literature

Ford

2016

Mental Health and Social Inclusion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose – Recovery has been debated in mental health for some time. Attempts to clarify and make recovery operational have served to add confusion and uncertainty. This has failed to unite service users and service providers due to differing approaches, despite the rhetoric. The purpose of this paper is to offer an overview and to position the context from a humanistic and salutogenic perspective appreciating new approaches and influences for people in their journey of recovery having been given a diagnosis of schizophrenia. Design/methodology/approach – All literature available could not be included and therefore the author did not select papers purely demonstrating outcome statistics. The preference was to address papers looking at the connections people have and the important factors they feel contribute towards recovery. Findings – An agreed definition of recovery cannot be established, but differing perspectives need to be appreciated and considered if recovery is to be successfully achieved. Some mental health practitioners may feel they have an understanding of recovery, yet evidence continues to point to the uncertainty in practice and delivery of services. Newer incentives and recovery networks are establishing themselves to meet areas missed by traditional approaches. Originality/value – The value of this literature review is to highlight some of the areas already observed and to provoke the potential for fresh thinking in relation to a salutogenic approach taking into account the perceptions of the stakeholder groups. This would enable people to re-evaluate their thoughts and practice and contextualise where we are in relation to recovery for people diagnosed with schizophrenia.

show abstract

An analysis of the definitions and elements of recovery: A review of the literature.

Cited by 407 publications

References 53 publications

Person‐directed care planning in nursing homes: A scoping review

Person‐directed care planning in nursing homes: A scoping review

What in-patients want: a qualitative study of what's important to mental health service users in their recovery (Wayfinder Partnership)

Recovery from schizophrenia: developing context utilising the literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About