Reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the Self-Identified Stage of Recovery for people with long term mental illness

Departments of Psychiatric Nursing, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
International journal of mental health nursing (Impact Factor: 1.95). 06/2010; 19(3):195-202. DOI: 10.1111/j.1447-0349.2009.00656.x
Source: PubMed


The Self-Identified Stage of Recovery (SISR) is a two-part scale assessing both the stage of recovery (SISR-A) and the component processes of recovery (SISR-B) for people with mental illness. This study aimed to develop a Japanese version of the SISR and to examine its reliability and validity. The Japanese versions of the SISR-A and SISR-B were developed through focus group cognitive interviews and the translation-back translation procedure. A cross-sectional questionnaire survey was conducted of 223 participants who had long term mental illness, were aged 20 years or older, and currently living in communities and inpatient ward settings; 59.2% were males and the average age was 47.6 years. The questionnaire also included the 24-item Recovery Assessment Scale, Herth Hope Index, Empowerment Scale, and Resilience Scale. Cronbach's alpha coefficient, intraclass correlation coefficient, and weighted kappas were generally fair to high, and the SISR-A and SISR-B scores were positively correlated with other relevant scales. This study supported the reliability and validity of the Japanese versions of the SISR-A and SISR-B among people with long term mental illness in Japan.

1 Follower
10 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study quantitatively examined the association between recovery and benefit-finding among persons with a chronic mental illness in Japan. A cross-sectional questionnaire survey was conducted, with responses from 237 (74%) of 319 individuals (≥ 20 years old) with a chronic mental illness in community and inpatient ward settings. The data of 120 questionnaires were analyzed (men, 64%; average age, 41 years). The questionnaire included the Recovery Assessment Scale (RAS) and Self-identified Stage of Recovery Parts A and B (SISR-A and SISR-B) for assessing recovery and the Perceived Positive Change Scale (PPCS) for assessing benefit-finding. The total RAS and SISR-B scores strongly and positively correlated with the PPCS score. The PPCS score significantly differed among the recovery stages, as classified by the SISR-A, with higher scores at higher stages; the association was almost linear. The study confirmed the theoretically expected relationship between recovery and benefit-finding among these individuals. Benefit-finding might be associated not only with a higher stage of recovery but also with each step from one stage to another.
    Nursing and Health Sciences 06/2011; 13(2):126-32. DOI:10.1111/j.1442-2018.2011.00589.x · 1.04 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Studies investigating indicators of recovery from schizophrenia yielded two concepts of recovery. The first is the reduction of psychiatric symptoms and functional disabilities (‘clinical recovery’), while the second describes the individual adaptation process to the threat posed to the individual sense of self by the disorder and its negative consequences (‘personal recovery’). Evidence suggests that both perceptions contribute substantially to the understanding of recovery and require specific assessment and therapy. While current reviews of measures of clinical recovery exist, measures of personal recovery have yet to be investigated. Considering the steadily growing literature on recovery, this article gives an update about existing measures assessing personal recovery.
    European Psychiatry 11/2011; 27(1):19-32. DOI:10.1016/j.eurpsy.2011.01.007 · 3.44 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Developing a recovery focus in mental health services is a policy goal internationally, and hope is a central component of recovery. Yet determinants of hope of people with mental disorders are not well known, nor are strategies and interventions that increase hope. This study aims to systematically summarise the available evidence to fill four relevant knowledge gaps: (1) hope scales used in psychiatric research, (2) determinants of hope, (2) hope-fostering self-management strategies, and (3) interventions to increase hope for people with mental disorders. We conducted a systematic literature search in April 2011 and a narrative synthesis of publications including qualitative and quantitative studies. Results for the first time provide a comprehensive overview of existing evidence and identify important scientific knowledge gaps: (1) Hope scales used do slightly vary in focus but are overall comparable. (2) Most published research used cross-sectional designs resulting in a high number of potential determinants of hope. No studies prospectively investigated the influence of these determinants. (3) Hope fostering self-management strategies of people with mental disorders were described in qualitative studies only with experimental studies completely missing. (4) While some recovery oriented interventions were shown to increase hope as a secondary outcome, there are no successful interventions specifically aimed at increasing hope. This review provides the basis for both practical and research recommendations: The five most promising candidate interventions to improve hope in people with mental disorders are (i) collaborative strategies for illness management, (ii) fostering relationships, (iii) peer support, (iv) helping clients to assume control and to formulate and pursue realistic goals, and (v) specific interventions to support multiple positive factors such as self-esteem, self-efficacy, spirituality and well-being. These may serve to directly improve care and to develop theory-based models and testable interventions to improve hope in mental health as well as in allied fields.
    Social Science [?] Medicine 02/2012; 74(4):554-64. DOI:10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.11.008 · 2.89 Impact Factor
Show more