The Wellness Recovery Action Plan (WRAP): Workshop Evaluation

Doughty, Carolyn; Tse, Samson; Duncan, Natasha T.; McIntyre, Leo

doi:10.1080/10398560802043705

Cited by 37 publications

(67 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…WRAP's efficacy (25)(26)(27)(28)(29)(30)(31)(32)(33)(34) is supported by numerous nonexperimental studies (25,26,31,33), one quasi-experimental study (32), and two RCTs (27)(28)(29)(30). Both RCTs recruited relatively large samples (519 and 143 participants) with good retention rates, utilized blind assessors to administer standardized instruments of recovery outcomes, and delivered the intervention comparably to similar populations.…”

Section: Empirical Evidencementioning

confidence: 95%

Reviewing Illness Self-Management Programs: A Selection Guide for Consumers, Practitioners, and Administrators

Petros¹,

Solomon²

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Illness self-management (ISM) programs for adults with serious mental illness offer strategies to increase self-directed recovery activities to maximize wellness and increase independence from the service delivery system. This article describes five of the most popular ISM programs: Pathways to Recovery, The Recovery Workbook, Building Recovery of Individual Dreams and Goals through Education and Support, Wellness and Recovery Action Planning, and Illness Management and Recovery. It provides guidance for administrators, practitioners, and consumers for the purposes of selecting the program or programs providing the best fit. The framework for describing the five programs encompasses four contextual domains that supplement empirical evidence for a more comprehensive evaluation: structure, value orientation toward recovery, methods of teaching, and educational content. Contextual domains distinguish programs from one another, including length and time commitment, requisite resources, inclusion of group support, utilization of medical language and pathology, degree of traditional didactic education, and prioritization of consumer-driven self-exploration. The authors also searched PsycINFO, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Reviews for empirical evidence and evaluated the five programs on the strength of the evidence and the effectiveness of the intervention. Evidence of program effectiveness was found to range from low to moderate. However, empirical evidence alone is insufficient for selecting among the five programs, and contextual domains may offer the most relevant guidance by matching program features with goals of consumers, practitioners, and administrators.

show abstract

Section: Empirical Evidencementioning

confidence: 95%

Reviewing Illness Self-Management Programs: A Selection Guide for Consumers, Practitioners, and Administrators

Petros¹,

Solomon²

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although this study has focussed on practitioners' experiences, other evaluations have shown similarly positive outcomes of joint learning for service users and family members (Doughty et al, 2008;Higgins et al, 2012). Therefore, further research is indicated with larger samples to explore the impact for both staff and service users.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 85%

“…While there has been a growing body of literature and opinion on mental health training delivered by trainers with lived experience of mental distress (Fadden et al, 2005;Khoo et al, 2004;McAndrew & Samociuk, 2003;Spencer et al, 2011;Tew et al, 2004), there has been only limited research into models of recovery training for staff (Gudjonsson et al, 2010;Slade et al, 2009). This paper looks in detail at a recovery training programme that was not only facilitated by people with lived experience, but was also delivered to a mixed group of practitioners and service usersa configuration that has been tried to a limited extent elsewhere (Doughty et al, 2008;Higgins et al, 2010). Such a configuration provides further opportunities to break down barriers and disrupt the implicit constructions of "them" and "us" that can underpin much of conventional professional practice but which may be seen as inimical to a form of practice which is about being an ally in the recovery process rather than delivering treatment or care.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Toward a new way of relating: An evaluation of recovery training delivered jointly to service users and staff

Salkeld

Wagstaff

Tew

2012

Journal of Mental Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: This paper explores an innovative approach to recovery training in which the medium of deliveryas much as the actual content of what was deliveredchallenged the conventional construction of professional relationships. Methodology: The training group comprised service users together with the practitioners who normally worked with them and would continue to do so. The paper examines the staff experiences of the training and the impact on their practice through qualitative interviews conducted 6 months post-training with a sample of four staff participants. Findings: The thematic analysis of the interviews demonstrated that this approach could be a powerful experience that brought about lasting changes in working relationships and professional identities. Particular themes that emerged included challenging power relationships and the value of the trainers disclosing their own lived experience and recovery narratives in creating a "safe space" for collaborative learning. Implications for future practice: This approach demonstrated the potential to be transformative for staff and their relationships with service users, although care may need to be exercised when offering it to staff with little prior exposure to recovery-oriented practice.

show abstract

“…Workshops on WRAP have shown that professionals and mental health care consumers share similar attitudes and knowledge about recovery, although the professionals probably had prior exposure to models of recovery programs before the workshop. Therefore, the training of mental health professionals will benefit by including education related to patients' perspective of satisfaction in mental health programs like WRAP (Doughty et al, 2008).…”

Section: It Takes Timementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The following are outcomes of the WRAP studies: (1) WRAP workshops contributed to significant advances in recovery at-titude and knowledge with no differences between consumers and professionals (Doughty, Tse, Duncan, & McIntyre, 2008);…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Participant Satisfaction with Wellness Recovery Action Plan (WRAP)

Wilson

Hutson

Holston

2013

Issues in Mental Health Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Outpatient programs are often promoted as vehicles for mental health recovery. Yet, few programs include patients' perspectives about their satisfaction with these programs. This descriptive, cross-sectional survey investigated patients' satisfaction with Wellness Recovery Action Plan (WRAP). Participants completed the Mental Health Statistics Improvement Program instrument (n = 26) and qualitative interviews (n = 18). Data were analyzed using multivariate statistics (α = .05) and content analysis. Three composite variables explained 48% of the variance (p = .00) in patient satisfaction. Four themes emerged: Retrospective Desire for Early WRAP Introduction, Pay It Forward, Unconditional Relational Support, and It Takes Time. Future research is warranted to promote WRAP's use in broader settings.

show abstract

The Wellness Recovery Action Plan (WRAP): Workshop Evaluation

Abstract: This study provides preliminary support for the use of WRAP to change consumers' and mental health professionals' knowledge and attitudes about recovery.

Cited by 37 publications

References 6 publications

Reviewing Illness Self-Management Programs: A Selection Guide for Consumers, Practitioners, and Administrators

Reviewing Illness Self-Management Programs: A Selection Guide for Consumers, Practitioners, and Administrators

Toward a new way of relating: An evaluation of recovery training delivered jointly to service users and staff

Participant Satisfaction with Wellness Recovery Action Plan (WRAP)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About