Abstract:Colleges are often substance‐saturated environments, creating challenges for students trying to maintain recovery from substance use disorders. Using phenomenological method, this study sought to enhance understanding of the experiences of college students in recovery. Findings include 6 main themes that describe the experiences of participants, and implications for professional counselors are delineated from these findings.
“…Lived experience refers to studies in which students answered open-ended questions about their recovery experiences. Studies with the outcome of lived experience that were qualitative designs and coded information collected in semi-structured interviews to identify themes reported among CRP students were very common (16/54, 30%) in the review (Bell et al, 2009;Iarussi, 2018;Kollath-Cattano et al, 2018;Terrion, 2013;Walker, 2017;Whitney, 2018;Woodford, 2001;Workman, 2020). Other studies of lived experience investigated CRP alumni (Lovett, 2015), recovery discourses (Whitney, 2018), what made student recovery possible (Washburn, 2016), why students joined a CRP (Harris et al, 2014;Laudet, Harris, Kimball, Winters, & Moberg, 2016), and the role of recovery identities among CRP members (Hoffman, 2020).…”
Section: Lived Experiencementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some of the common themes reported among these studies include the importance of on-campus mutual help meetings (Whitney, 2018), the role of the student-drop-in center (Ashford, Brown, Eisenhart, et al, 2018), and the role of community and social support among CRP students (Harris et al, 2014). Likewise, other qualitative investigations looked at themes related to the importance of CRP seminars and addiction education programming (Bell et al, 2009;Casiraghi & Mulsow, 2010), managing emotions (Lovett, 2015), academic success (Terrion, 2013), enhancing overall wellness (Iarussi, 2018), and recovery housing and diversity in CRP programs (Woodford, 2001). These ndings should act as a springboard for new quantitative research projects examining these common topics in detail.…”
The health and well-being of students in recovery from substance use disorder is increasingly being recognized as a priority on college campuses. This scoping review maps the state of the existing literature evaluating collegiate recovery programming to highlight research gaps and inform policy. We conducted a systematic search of articles related to collegiate recovery programming published before August 2020. The 15 extracted study characteristics included publication type, study design, primary outcomes, reporting of behavioral addictions and mutual-help groups, sample demographic information, school size, ownership, and funding source. The PRISMA-guided search strategy identi ed 357 articles for abstract review; of 113 articles retained for full-text review, 54 studies were identi ed for nal inclusion. Primary outcomes were coded into four domains: clinical, lived experience, program characterization, and stigma. All but one of the articles were observational (57%) or qualitative (41%) research designs. Government or foundation grants funded only 11% of the studies. Findings suggest that collegiate recovery programs reduce risk of relapse, improve educational outcomes, and provide social support for students in recovery. The domains identi ed offer a framework for healthcare providers, college administrators, and researchers to understand and improve programs, thereby better serving this marginalized student group.
“…Lived experience refers to studies in which students answered open-ended questions about their recovery experiences. Studies with the outcome of lived experience that were qualitative designs and coded information collected in semi-structured interviews to identify themes reported among CRP students were very common (16/54, 30%) in the review (Bell et al, 2009;Iarussi, 2018;Kollath-Cattano et al, 2018;Terrion, 2013;Walker, 2017;Whitney, 2018;Woodford, 2001;Workman, 2020). Other studies of lived experience investigated CRP alumni (Lovett, 2015), recovery discourses (Whitney, 2018), what made student recovery possible (Washburn, 2016), why students joined a CRP (Harris et al, 2014;Laudet, Harris, Kimball, Winters, & Moberg, 2016), and the role of recovery identities among CRP members (Hoffman, 2020).…”
Section: Lived Experiencementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some of the common themes reported among these studies include the importance of on-campus mutual help meetings (Whitney, 2018), the role of the student-drop-in center (Ashford, Brown, Eisenhart, et al, 2018), and the role of community and social support among CRP students (Harris et al, 2014). Likewise, other qualitative investigations looked at themes related to the importance of CRP seminars and addiction education programming (Bell et al, 2009;Casiraghi & Mulsow, 2010), managing emotions (Lovett, 2015), academic success (Terrion, 2013), enhancing overall wellness (Iarussi, 2018), and recovery housing and diversity in CRP programs (Woodford, 2001). These ndings should act as a springboard for new quantitative research projects examining these common topics in detail.…”
The health and well-being of students in recovery from substance use disorder is increasingly being recognized as a priority on college campuses. This scoping review maps the state of the existing literature evaluating collegiate recovery programming to highlight research gaps and inform policy. We conducted a systematic search of articles related to collegiate recovery programming published before August 2020. The 15 extracted study characteristics included publication type, study design, primary outcomes, reporting of behavioral addictions and mutual-help groups, sample demographic information, school size, ownership, and funding source. The PRISMA-guided search strategy identi ed 357 articles for abstract review; of 113 articles retained for full-text review, 54 studies were identi ed for nal inclusion. Primary outcomes were coded into four domains: clinical, lived experience, program characterization, and stigma. All but one of the articles were observational (57%) or qualitative (41%) research designs. Government or foundation grants funded only 11% of the studies. Findings suggest that collegiate recovery programs reduce risk of relapse, improve educational outcomes, and provide social support for students in recovery. The domains identi ed offer a framework for healthcare providers, college administrators, and researchers to understand and improve programs, thereby better serving this marginalized student group.
“…The process of recovery entails holistic and continued growth and enhancement of personal health, well-being, and quality of life (Ashford et al, 2019). Sustaining recovery and positive mental health after treatment requires social and community supports (Iarussi, 2018), which can be difficult to come by on some college campuses (Wiebe, Cleveland, & Dean, 2010). Thus, to combat campus-related risks for recovering students (e.g., high rates of drinking among the general college student population; ACHA, 2017) and sponsor a supportive social/community network, many universities are establishing collegiate recovery communities (CRCs).…”
Exercise is especially beneficial for individuals recovering from addiction. In addition to improved physical, emotional, and mental health, exercise is linked to long-term recovery for those overcoming addiction. With nearly 10% of college students in recovery, and many utilizing campus resources such as collegiate recovery communities (CRCs) to support their recovery, it is important to understand the relationship between exercise and the recovery process among college students. The purpose of this study was to use social network analysis and theory to understand exercise behaviors among a group of college students in recovery. The relationship between exercise and sobriety, mental health variables, and social connections was examined among a network of students involved in a CRC. Of the 50 students involved in this network, 40 participated in the study (80% response rate). Logistic regression analysis revealed a significant model (R 2 = .598, p < .0001) predicting whether CRC members exercised enough to yield health benefits. Length of sobriety, higher stress, lower depression, having fewer network ties, and being connected directly to others exercising regularly were significant predictor variables in the model. This study supports the relationship between sobriety and exercise, as well as an association between network connections and exercise behaviors. Incorporating exercise opportunities as part of CRC programming to help students stay sober, as well as identifying key target points for intervention within similar groups of students, could be useful in future practice.
“…For example, a mental health professional on campus may be attempting to understand and assist a student during the recovery process by recommending an abstinence-based approach to recovery given that this approach has been identified as a best practice for college student populations (e.g., Association of Recovery in Higher Education [ARHE], 2020), even though a recently adopted definition of alcohol recovery by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) acknowledges that non-abstinence-based recovery is also a viable path for the general population (Hagman et al, 2022;Witkiewitz et al, 2020). Recent qualitative studies that have focused on alcohol recovery within college student populations appear to lend evidence for this recently adopted definition of recovery being consistent with students' lived experiences (Iarussi, 2018;Vest et al, 2021). However, a more targeted methodological approach is needed to better understand the language that best reflects recovery for all college students regardless of their current drinking status.…”
Given that approximately 5% of the U.S. population is currently attending college, research is needed to better understand the language that college students use to describe alcohol recovery regardless of their current drinking behavior. College student perceptions of alcohol recovery are important, given that students may experience an alcohol use disorder themselves or may encounter others with an alcohol use disorder. Research on college student perceptions of alcohol recovery in the literature is scarce but is needed to better understand the alcohol recovery process. The current mixed-methods study examines language that college students use to describe alcohol recovery based on findings from two focus group interviews. The focus groups were conducted with college students who reported using alcohol at least once in their lifetime. All participants ( N = 18) were asked questions regarding language perceived to be associated with alcohol recovery. Data were examined within a thematic analysis framework. The three central themes related to alcohol recovery that emerged in the study were harm reduction–based recovery, abstinence-based recovery, and social correlates of recovery. College students rated the terms “recovered,” “drinking reduction,” and “sobriety” as being highly representative of being in recovery, whereas the terms “bars” and “light drinker” were identified as not being representative of recovery. A better understanding of these themes will help the field understand the language that college students use to describe alcohol recovery.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.