Book contents
- Dynamic Pathways to Recovery from Alcohol Use Disorder
- Dynamic Pathways to Recovery from Alcohol Use Disorder
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Introduction
- Part I Micro Level
- Part II Meso Level
- Part III Macro Level
- 16 Recovery Communities
- 17 Disparities in Alcohol Treatment Access in Rural Areas
- 18 Recovery, Communities, and the Organized Recovery Movement
- 19 Alcohol Control Policy and Regulations to Promote Recovery from Alcohol Use Disorder
- 20 Causal Inference Approaches to Studying Recovery from Alcohol Use Disorder
- 21 Building on Collaborative Research to Co-Design SURE Recovery, a Mobile Application for People with Experience of Alcohol and Other Drug Problems
- 22 Economic Methods Used to Evaluate Recovery Programs for Alcohol Use Disorder
- Conclusions and Future Directions
- Index
- References
21 - Building on Collaborative Research to Co-Design SURE Recovery, a Mobile Application for People with Experience of Alcohol and Other Drug Problems
from Part III - Macro Level
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 December 2021
Book contents
- Dynamic Pathways to Recovery from Alcohol Use Disorder
- Dynamic Pathways to Recovery from Alcohol Use Disorder
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Introduction
- Part I Micro Level
- Part II Meso Level
- Part III Macro Level
- 16 Recovery Communities
- 17 Disparities in Alcohol Treatment Access in Rural Areas
- 18 Recovery, Communities, and the Organized Recovery Movement
- 19 Alcohol Control Policy and Regulations to Promote Recovery from Alcohol Use Disorder
- 20 Causal Inference Approaches to Studying Recovery from Alcohol Use Disorder
- 21 Building on Collaborative Research to Co-Design SURE Recovery, a Mobile Application for People with Experience of Alcohol and Other Drug Problems
- 22 Economic Methods Used to Evaluate Recovery Programs for Alcohol Use Disorder
- Conclusions and Future Directions
- Index
- References
Summary
A collaborative research approach was used to co-develop patient reported outcome measures or PROMS. One of our PROMS (SURE) assesses recovery from alcohol and other drug problems, and another (SUSS) assesses sleep problems. People using SURE and SUSS reported that they would like to complete them on their mobile phones and tablet computers so that they could record and refer back to their scores. This chapter describes the collaborative research process used to co-design a mobile application (app) called SURE Recovery, including the experiences of working with a diverse team of people with lived experience of addiction, researchers, app developers, and clinicians. The chapter also provides reflections on the challenges encountered and the lessons learned. Insights and advice for others are offered who might be interested in developing similar recovery-oriented apps in the future.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Dynamic Pathways to Recovery from Alcohol Use DisorderMeaning and Methods, pp. 380 - 399Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2022
References
Ashcroft, J., Wykes, T., Taylor, J., Crowther, A., & Szmukler, G. (2016). Impact on the individual: What do patients and carers gain, lose, and expect from being involved in research? Journal of Mental Health, 25(1), 28–35. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638237.2015.1101424CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brett, J., Staniszewska, S., Mockford, C., Herron-Marx, S., Hughes, J., Tysall, C., & Suleman, R. (2014). Mapping the impact of patient and public involvement on health and social care research: A systematic review. Health Expectations, 17(5), 637–650. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1369-7625.2012.00795.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dawson, J. (2008). Measuring health status. In Neale, J. (Ed.), Research methods for health and social care (pp. 181–194). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Ennis, L., & Wykes, T. (2013). Impact of patient involvement in mental health research: longitudinal study. British Journal of Psychiatry, 203(5), 381–386. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.112.119818Google Scholar
Hatton, S. (2008). Choosing the right prioritization method. In 19th Australian Conference on Software Engineering (aswec 2008) (pp. 517–526). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ASWEC.2008.4483241Google Scholar
Involve (2019). National standards for public involvement in research. www.invo.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/71110_A4_Public_Involvement_Standards_v4_WEB.pdfGoogle Scholar
Islind, A. S., Lindroth, T., Lundin, J., & Steineck, G. (2019). Co-designing a digital platform with boundary objects: Bringing together heterogeneous users in healthcare. Health and Technology, 9, 425–438. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12553–019-00332-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jennings, H., Slade, M., Bates, P., Munday, E., & Toney, R. (2018). Best practice framework for patient and public involvement (PPI) in collaborative data analysis of qualitative mental health research: Methodology development and refinement. BMC Psychiatry, 18(1), 213. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888–018-1794-8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kensing, F., & Greenbaum, J. (2012). Heritage: Having a say. In Simonsen, J. & Robertson, T. (Eds.), Routledge International Handbook of Participatory Design (pp. 21–36). Routledge. www.forskningsdatabasen.dk/da/catalog/2444729034Google Scholar
Krebs, P., & Duncan, D. T. (2015). Health app use among US mobile phone owners: A national survey. JMIR MHealth and UHealth, 3(4), e101. https://doi.org/10.2196/mhealth.4924Google Scholar
Milward, J., Day, E., Wadsworth, E., Strang, J., & Lynskey, M. (2015). Mobile phone ownership, usage, and readiness to use by patients in drug treatment. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 146(1), 111–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2014.11.001CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Neale, J., Bouteloup, A., Getty, M., Hogan, C., Lennon, P., Mc Cusker, M., & Strang, J. (2017). Why we should conduct research in collaboration with people who use alcohol and other drugs. Addiction, 112(12), 2084–2085. https://doi.org/10.1111/add.14015Google Scholar
Neale, J., & Strang, J. (2015). Philosophical ruminations on measurement: Methodological orientations of patient reported outcome measures (PROMS). Journal of Mental Health, 24(3), 123–125. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638237.2015.1036978Google Scholar
Neale, J., Tompkins, C., Wheeler, C., Finch, E., Marsden, J., Mitcheson, L., Rose, D., Wykes, T., & Strang, J. (2015). “You’re all going to hate the word ‘recovery’ by the end of this”: Service users’ views of measuring addiction recovery. Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy, 22(1), 26–34. https://doi.org/10.3109/09687637.2014.947564Google Scholar
Neale, J., Vitoratou, S., Finch, E., Lennon, P., Mitcheson, L., Panebianco, D., Rose, D., Strang, J., Wykes, T., & Marsden, J. (2016). Development and validation of “SURE”: A patient reported outcome measure (PROM) for recovery from drug and alcohol dependence. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 165, 159–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2016.06.006Google Scholar
Neale, J., Vitoratou, S., Lennon, P., Meadows, R., Nettleton, S., Panebianco, D., Strang, J., & Marsden, J. (2018). Development and early validation of a patient-reported outcome measure to assess sleep amongst people experiencing problems with alcohol or other drugs. Sleep, 41(4), 1–14. https://doi.org/https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/sleep/zsy013CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nettleton, S., Neale, J., & Pickering, L. (2011). Techniques and transitions: A sociological analysis of sleeping practices amongst recovering heroin users. Social Science and Medicine, 72(8), 1367–1373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.02.040Google Scholar
Powell, B. J., Waltz, T. J., Chinman, M. J., Damschroder, L. J., Smith, J. L., Matthieu, M. M., Proctor, E. K., & Kirchner, J. A. E. (2015). A refined compilation of implementation strategies: Results from the expert recommendations for implementing change (ERIC) project. Implementation Science, 10(1), 21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012–015-0209-1CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Serrano, K. J., Coa, K. I., Yu, M., Wolff-Hughes, D. L., & Atienza, A. A. (2017). Characterizing user engagement with health app data: A data mining approach. Translational Behavioral Medicine, 7(2), 277–285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13142–017-0508-yGoogle Scholar
Staley, K. (2017). Changing what researchers “think and do”: Is this how involvement impacts on research? Research for All, 1(1), 158–167. https://doi.org/10.18546/RFA.01.1.13Google Scholar
Szinay, D., Jones, A., Chadborn, T., Brown, J., & Naughton, F. (2020, May 29). Influences on the uptake of and engagement with health and well-being smartphone apps: Systematic review. Journal of Medical Internet Research. NLM (Medline). https://doi.org/10.2196/17572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
The Design Council (2007). Eleven lessons: Managing design in eleven global companies. www.designcouncil.org.ukGoogle Scholar
The Design Council (2015). Design methods for developing services. www.designcouncil.org.uk/sites/default/files/asset/document/DesignCouncil_Design%20methods%20for%20developing%20services.pdfGoogle Scholar
Trischler, J., Pervan, S. J., Kelly, S. J., & Scott, D. R. (2018). The value of co-design. Journal of Service Research, 21(1), 75–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670517714060CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trivedi, P., & Wykes, T. (2002). From passive subjects to equal partners: Qualitative review of user involvement in research. The British Journal of Psychiatry: The Journal of Mental Science, 181, 468–472. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12456515CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Visser, F. S., Stappers, P. J., & Remko, V. D. L. (2005). Context mapping: Experiences from practice. Co-Design: International Journal of CoCreation in Design and the Arts, 1(2). Taylor and Francis. https://cpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/u.osu.edu/dist/1/8276/files/2015/02/Contextmapping_SleeswijkVisseretal_05–10ugkj1.pdfGoogle Scholar
Williams, A. V., Strang, J., & Marsden, J. (2013). Development of opioid overdose knowledge (OOKS) and attitudes (OOAS) scales for take-home naloxone training evaluation. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 132(1–2), 383–386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2013.02.007Google Scholar