Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Development of a Self-Assessed Consumer Recovery Outcome Measure: My Voice, My Life

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We report the development of a self-assessed consumer recovery outcome measure by way of a consumer led and focused iterative process, informed by exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. The process began with a deliberately over-inclusive preliminary measure of 127 items, based on 12 presumptive domains derived from the recovery literature and consumer consultation, being piloted with over 500 mental health consumers. The full 504 participant data set was randomly split into two discrete sets of 300 and 204 to provide one for the initial exploratory factor analysis and another (of independence) for the subsequent confirmatory factor analysis and reliability estimation. Analyses identified and confirmed (using the separate data sets) a robust factor structure, with 11 distinct and relatively independent factors (relationships; day-to-day life; culture; physical health; quality of life; mental health; recovery; hope and empowerment; spirituality; resources; and satisfaction with services) underlying one substantial principal construct (that we refer to as consumer recovery). The measure was refined to 65 items, between three and ten items for each of the 11 domains, the reliabilities for which are uniformly high.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anastasi, A., & Urbina, S. (1997). Psychological testing (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, G., & Page, A. C. (2005). Outcome measurement, outcome management and monitoring. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 39, 649–651.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Anthony, W. (1993). Recovery from mental illness: the guiding vision of the mental health service system in the 1990s. Psychosocial Rehabilitation Journal, 16, 11–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arbuckle, J. (2005). Amos 6.0 user’s guide. Chicago: SPSS Inc.

  • Bandalos, D. L., & Finney, S. J. (2001). Item parcelling issues in structural equation modelling. In G. A. S. Marcoulides & E. Randall (Eds.), Advanced structural equation modelling: New developments and techniques (pp. 269–296). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, P. T., & Kline, P. (1981). Radial parcel factor analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 2, 311–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bellack, A. S. (2006). Scientific and consumer models of recovery in schizophrenia: Concordance, contrasts, and implications. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 32, 432–442.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Black, J., Lewis, T., McIntosh, P., Callaly, T., Coombs, T., Hunter, A., et al. (2009). It’s not that bad: The views of consumers and carers about routine outcome measurement in mental health. Australian Health Review, 33, 93–99.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Browne, M., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell-Orde, T., Chamberlin, J., Carpenter, J., & Leff, H. S. (2005). Measuring the promise: A compendium of recovery measures. Volume II. U.S. Cambridge: The Evaluation Center @ HSRI.

  • Cattell, R. B. (1974). Radial parcel factoring vs item factoring in defining personality structure in questionnaires: Theory and experimental checks. Australian Journal of Psychology, 26, 103–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chamberlin, J. (1978). On our own: Patient controlled alternatives to the mental health system. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochrane, A. (1999). Effective and efficiency: Random reflections on health services (2nd ed.). London: Royal Society of Medicine Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, R. (1999). Recovery: An alien concept. Gloucester: Hansell Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Compagni, A., Adams, N., & Daniels, A. (2006). International pathways to mental health system transformation: Strategies and challenges. Sacramento: California Institute for Mental Health.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corrigan, P. W., Salzer, M., Ralph, R., Sangster, Y., & Kreck, L. (2004). Examining the factor structure of the recovery assessment scale. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 30, 1034–1041.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, L., & Roe, D. (2007). Recovery from versus recovery in serious mental illness: One strategy for lessening confusion plaguing recovery. Journal of Mental Health, 16, 459–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deegan, P. (1988). Recovery: The lived experience of rehabilitation. Psychosocial Rehabilitation Journal, 11, 11–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzpatrick, R., Davey, C., Buxton, M. J., & Jones, D. R. (1998). Evaluating patient based outcome measures for use in clinical trials. Health Technology Assessment, 2. doi: 10.3310/hta2140.

  • Fonagy, P., Matthews, R., & Pilling, S. (2005). Outcomes measures implementation best practice guidance. United Kingdom: National Institute for Mental Health in England.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fossey, E. M., & Harvey, C. A. (2001). A conceptual review of functioning: Implications for the development of consumer outcome measures. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 35, 91–98.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Giffort, D., Schmook, A., Woody, C., Vollendorf, C., & Gervain, M. (1995). Construction of a scale to measure consumer recovery. Springfield: Illinois Office of Mental Health.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbody, S. M., House, A.O., & Sheldon, T. A. (2003). Outcomes measurement in psychiatry: A critical review of outcomes measurement in psychiatric research and practice. Report (24). York: NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination.

  • Goodheart, C. D. (2010). Economics and psychology practice: What we need to know and why. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 41, 189–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, S., Ellis, P., Haggerty, C., Pere, L., Platz, G., & McLaren, K. (2004). Preliminary work towards the development of a self-assessed measure of consumer outcome. Auckland: Health Research Council of New Zealand.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, C., Coombs, T., Buckingham, B., Eagar, K., Trauer, T., & Callaly, T. (2001). The Victorian mental health outcomes measurement strategy: Consumer perspectives on future directions for outcome self-assessment. Report of the consumer consultation project. Victoria: Department of Human Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie, D., McIntosh, M., Callaly, T., Trauer, T., & Coombs, T. (2008). Consumer attitudes towards the use of routine outcome measures in a public mental health service: A consumer-driven study. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing, 17, 92–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Happell, B. (2008). How do we know it works? Mental health service evaluation, recovery and routine outcome measurement. International Journal of Psychiatric Nursing Research, 14, 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hau, K. T., & Marsh, H. W. (2004). The use of item parcels in structural equation modeling: Non-normal data and small sample sizes. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 57, 327–351.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins, E. J., Lambert, M. J., Vermeersch, D. A., Slade, K. L., & Tuttle, K. C. (2004). The therapeutic effects of providing patient progress information to therapists and patients. Psychotherapy Research, 14, 308–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, R., McLean, J., Peck, D., Pullen, I., Greenfield, A., McArthur, W., et al. (2004). The Scottish 700 outcomes study: A comparative evaluation of the health of the nation outcome scale (HoNOS), the Avon mental health measure (AVON), and an idiographic scale (OPUS) in adult mental health. Journal of Mental Health, 13, 93–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kishton, J. M., & Widaman, K. F. (1994). Unidimensional versus domain representative parceling of questionnaire items: An empirical example. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54, 757–765.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehman, A. F., Kreyenbuhl, J., Buchanan, R. W., Dickerson, F. B., Dixon, L. B., Goldberg, R., et al. (2004). The schizophrenia patient outcomes research team (PORT): Updated treatment recommendations 2003. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 30, 193–217.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lelliott, P., Beevor, A., Hogman, G., Hyslop, J., Lathlean, J., & Ward, M. (2001). Carers’ and Users’ expectations of services—user version (CUES-U): A new instrument to measure the experience of users of mental health services. British Journal of Psychiatry, 179, 67–72.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Maruish, M. E. (Ed.). (2004). The use of psychological testing for treatment planning and outcomes assessment. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNaught, M., Caputi, P., Oades, L. G., & Deane, F. P. (2007). Testing the validity of the recovery assessment scale using an Australian sample. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 41, 450–457.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, M., Siggins, I., Kavanagh, D., & Donald, M. (2003). Consumer self-rated outcome measures in mental health. Melbourne: Mental Health Branch, Department of Human Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ohio Department of Mental Health. (2009). The ohio mental health consumer outcomes system procedural manual (11th ed. revised). Columbus: Ohio Department of Mental Health.

  • Perkins, R. (2001). What constitutes success? The relative priority of service users’ and clinicians’ views of mental health services. British Journal of Psychiatry, 179, 9–10.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ralph, R. O., & Corrigan, P. W. (Eds.). (2005). Recovery in mental illness: Broadening our understanding of wellness. Washington: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ridgway, P. A. (2001). Re-storying psychiatric disability: Learning from first person narrative accounts of recovery. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 24, 335–343.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ridgway, P., & Press, A. (2004). Assessing the recovery-orientation of your mental health program: A user’s guide for the recovery-enhancing environment scale (REE). Version 1. Lawrence: University of Kansas, School of Social Welfare, Office of Mental Health Training and Research.

  • Schrank, B., & Slade, M. (2007). Recovery in psychiatry. Psychiatric Bulletin, 31, 321–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slade, M. (2009). Personal recovery and mental illness. Cambridge: University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • SPSS Inc. (2004). SPSS for windows release 13.0. Chicago: SPSS Inc.

  • Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2005). National consensus conference on mental health recovery and systems transformation. Rockville: Department of Health and Human Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • Terwee, C. B., Bot, S. D. M., de Boer, M. R., van der Windt, D. A. W. M., Knol, D. L., Dekker, J., et al. (2007). Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60, 34–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • The ACHMA Workgroup. (2003). Financing results and value in behavioural health services. Administration and Policy in Mental Health, 31, 85–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ullman, J. B. (1996). Structural equation modeling. In B. G. Tabachnick & L. S. Fidell (Eds.), Using multivariate statistics (3rd ed., pp. 709–819). New York: HarperCollins College Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), & Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH). (2009). Guidance for Industry. Patient-reported outcome measures: Use in medical product development to support labeling claims. Retrieved January 20, 2010 from www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM193282.pdf.

  • Young, S., & Bullock, W. (2003). The mental health recovery measure. Toledo: University of Toledo.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychological Medicine, University of Otago, P.O. Box 7343, Wellington, 6242, New Zealand

    Sarah E. Gordon & Pete M. Ellis

  2. Department of Palliative Care, Policy and Rehabilitation, King’s College London, Cicely Saunders Institute, London, UK

    Richard J. Siegert

  3. School of Psychology, Victoria University, Wellington, New Zealand

    Frank H. Walkey

Authors
  1. Sarah E. Gordon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pete M. Ellis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Richard J. Siegert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Frank H. Walkey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sarah E. Gordon.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gordon, S.E., Ellis, P.M., Siegert, R.J. et al. Development of a Self-Assessed Consumer Recovery Outcome Measure: My Voice, My Life. Adm Policy Ment Health 40, 199–210 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-012-0417-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-012-0417-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation