The development of the Mental Health Confidence Scale: A measure of self-efficacy in individuals diagnosed with mental disorders.
ABSTRACT This article discusses a new scale for the measurement of self-efficacy among persons dealing with mental disorders and examines the relationship between involvement in self-help and self-efficacy. The Mental Health Confidence Scale scale is based on theories of self-efficacy and recent qualitative research on self-help groups. It is designed to assess the self-efficacy beliefs of persons dealing with mental disorders, particularly how confident they are about their ability to deal with those things that commonly influence their lives. The presumed 3-factor structure of the scale (optimism, coping, advocacy) was tested using data from a study on understanding factors associated with participation and nonparticipation in mental health self-help groups; Ss were 554 self-help group participants, mean age 42 yrs. Results of confirmatory factor analyses support the 3-factor structure and suggest that the scale is a reliable means of assessing mental health related efficacy beliefs. In correlational analyses, generally positive associations were found between participation in self-help and self-efficacy. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
- SourceAvailable from: Victoria Bird[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: There is a consensus about the importance of 'recovery' in mental health services, but the evidence base is limited. A two centre, cluster randomised controlled trial. Participants are community-based mental health teams, and service users aged 18-65 years with a primary clinical diagnosis of psychosis. In relation to the REFOCUS Manual researchintorecovery.com/refocus, which describes a 12-month, pro-recovery intervention based on the REFOCUS Model, the objectives are: (1) To establish the effectiveness of the intervention described in the REFOCUS Manual; (2) To validate the REFOCUS Model; (3) To establish and optimise trial parameters for the REFOCUS Manual; and (4) To understand the relationship between clinical outcomes and recovery outcomes. The hypothesis for the main study is that service users in the intervention arm will experience significantly greater increases in measures of personal recovery (as measured by the QPR) compared to service users receiving care from control teams. The hypothesis for the secondary study is that black service users in the intervention arm will experience significantly greater increases in measures of personal recovery (as measured by the QPR) and client satisfaction (as measured by the CSQ) compared to Black service users receiving care from control teams. The intervention comprises treatment as usual plus two components: recovery-promoting relationships and working practices. The control condition is treatment as usual. The primary outcme is the Process of Recovery Questionnaire (QPR). Secondary outcomes are satisfaction, Goal setting - Personal Primary Outcome, hope, well-being, empowerment, and quality of life. Primary outcomes for the secondary study will be QPR and satisfaction. Cost data will be estimated, and clinical outcomes will also be reported (symptomatology, need, social disability, functioning). 29 teams (15 intervention and 14 control) will be randomised. Within each team, 15 services users will be randomly chosen, giving a total sample of 435 service users (225 in intervention and 210 in control). Power for the main study: 336 service users will give power to detect a medium effect size of 0.4 (alpha 0.05, power = 0.8) on both QPR sub-scales. Power for the secondary study: 89 participants will give power to detect an effect size of 0.67 on both QPR sub-scales and on CSQ. A range of approaches are used to minimise bias, although service users and clinicians cannot be blinded. This cluster-RCT will evaluate a pro-recovery intervention in community mental health teams. ISRCTN: ISRCTN02507940.BMC Psychiatry 11/2011; 11:185. · 2.23 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To investigate the effect of a (minimally) guided peer support group (GPSG) for people with psychosis on social network, social support, self-efficacy, self-esteem, and quality of life, and to evaluate the intervention and its economic consequences. In a multi-center randomized controlled trial with 56 patients in the peer support group and 50 patients in the control condition, patients were assessed at baseline and after the last meeting at 8 months. The experimental group showed GPSG to have a positive effect on social network and social support compared with the control condition. In the experimental condition, high attenders favored over low attenders on increased social support, self-efficacy, and quality of life. Economic evaluation demonstrated groups to be without financial consequences. The GPSG-intervention was positively evaluated. Peer support groups are a useful intervention for people suffering from psychosis by improving their social network.Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 08/2008; 118(1):64-72. · 4.86 Impact Factor