Recovery Assessment Scale‐Domains and Stages: Measurement capacity, relevance, acceptability and feasibility of use with young people

Abstract

Aim The Recovery Assessment Scale‐Domains and Stages (RAS‐DS) is a self‐rated measure of mental health recovery. While this instrument has demonstrated good measurement properties and acceptability to clinicians and consumers in adult mental health services, it has not been evaluated in the context of youth‐focused mental health services. This study was established to evaluate the measurement properties, feasibility and acceptability of the RAS‐DS in a youth mental health service context. Methods Young people accessing a youth mental health service were invited to complete the RAS‐DS and both young people and clinicians provided feedback about its usefulness. Analyses of the measurement properties of the RAS‐DS were completed using Rasch analysis. Usability feedback was analysed using descriptive statistics and constant comparative analysis. Results Fifty‐eight consumer‐clinician dyads participated. Analyses revealed that items on the RAS‐DS generally demonstrated good fit with the expectations of the Rasch model and clinician and consumer feedback was generally positive. Ninety‐one percent of young people completed the RAS‐DS in less than 15 minutes. Thirty‐four percent of young people had measure scores above the level of the “hardest” item on the RAS‐DS, suggesting that measurement precision is lower for individuals at more advanced stages of recovery. Conclusions This study demonstrates that the RAS‐DS has acceptable measurement properties and was acceptable to young people and clinicians. Future research should explore the use of the RAS‐DS by young people in other contexts as well as explore whether additional items could be added to capture the later stages of recovery for young people.

A short form of the Recovery Assessment Scale‐Domains and Stages: Development and validation among adults with anxiety disorders

“…The use of such a scale is highly desirable as self‐management is an integral and highly valued aspect of treatment among individuals with high prevalence psychological conditions (e.g., Coulombe et al, 2016; Villaggi et al, 2015). Its brevity also allows for wide application in settings such as general medical practice, community clinics, private psychology and psychiatry practice, youth mental health services (Hancock et al, 2019) and other psychiatric and community settings (Hancock et al, 2018; Waks et al, 2017). Hence, the use of recovery‐based progress monitoring and outcome measures can be considered centrally relevant in the adoption of a recovery perspective in diverse mental health settings (Villaggi et al, 2015; Waks et al, 2017).…”

“…Initial analyses aimed to confirm psychometric characteristics of the RAS‐DS in adults living with self‐reported anxiety and related disorders. The focal analysis, therefore, was a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) modelling the four‐factor structure reported in other populations (e.g., Hancock et al, 2015, 2019). The present study met acceptable sample size requirements for reliable CFA.…”

“…These authors endorsed a 31‐item solution, although they acknowledged that improvements to the scale could still be made (Hancock et al, 2011). Further studies have since refined the scale and subscales on the basis of qualitative methodologies (i.e., interviews, focus groups) and pilot testing with mental health staff and consumers, although no formal factor analytic techniques have been applied (Hancock et al, 2013, 2012, 2019).…”

Enhancing functional recovery for young people recovering from first episode psychosis via sport-based life skills training: outcomes of a feasibility and pilot study

“…Data collection . Pre-intervention, young participants were offered the option to complete three additional pre-assessment measurements: (1) the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ; Craig et al, 2003 ), selected for its utility in assessing physical activity levels in youth aged 15 and older, (2) the Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction and Frustration Scale (BPNSFS, Chen et al, 2015 ), selected to assess the satisfaction and frustration of the psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness, and (3) the Recovery Assessment Scale – Domains and Stages (RAS-DS; Hancock et al, 2019 ), selected for its ability to track mental health recovery outcomes. The measurements were given primarily to assess the feasibility of their inclusion in the intervention and subsequent impact on engagement, and as such were optional.…”

The effectiveness of a feminist-informed, individualised counselling intervention for the treatment of eating disorders: a case series study

“…Higher scores indicate better recovery. The RAS-DS has acceptable internal consistency and construct validity and has been demonstrated to be sensitive to changes in recovery over time [ 58 , 59 ]. In this study, Cronbach’s α values at each timepoint for the Doing Things I Value, Looking Forward, Mastering My Illness, and Connecting and Belonging subscales and the RAS-DS total score ranged between 0.77 and 0.85, 0.87–0.94, 0.73–0.91, 0.69–0.85, and 0.90–0.97 respectively.…”