TY - JOUR
T1 - Organisational and student characteristics, fidelity, funding models, and unit costs of recovery colleges in 28 countries
T2 - a cross-sectional survey
AU - RECOLLECT International Research Consortium
AU - Hayes, Daniel
AU - Hunter-Brown, Holly
AU - Camacho, Elizabeth
AU - McPhilbin, Merly
AU - Elliott, Rachel A.
AU - Ronaldson, Amy
AU - Bakolis, Ioannis
AU - Repper, Julie
AU - Meddings, Sara
AU - Stergiopoulos, Vicky
AU - Brophy, Lisa
AU - Miyamoto, Yuki
AU - Castelein, Stynke
AU - Klevan, Trude Gøril
AU - Elton, Dan
AU - Grant-Rowles, Jason
AU - Kotera, Yasuhiro
AU - Henderson, Claire
AU - Slade, Mike
AU - De Ruysscher, Clara
AU - Okoliyski, Michail
AU - Kubinová, Petra
AU - Eplov, Lene Falgaard
AU - Toernes, Charlotte
AU - Narusson, Dagmar
AU - Tinland, Aurélie
AU - Puschner, Bernd
AU - Hiltensperger, Ramona
AU - Lucchi, Fabio
AU - Borg, Marit
AU - Tan, Roger Boon Meng
AU - Sornchai, Chatdanai
AU - Tiengtom, Kim
AU - Farkas, Marianne
AU - Morland-Jones, Hannah
AU - Butler, Ann
AU - Mpango, Richard
AU - Tse, Samson
AU - Kondor, Zsuzsa
AU - Ryan, Michael
AU - Zuaboni, Gianfranco
AU - Hanlon, Charlotte
AU - Harcla, Claire
AU - Vanderplasschen, Wouter
AU - Arbour, Simone
AU - Silverstone, Denise
AU - Bejerholm, Ulrika
AU - Dunnett, Danielle
AU - Stepanian, Katy
AU - Jebara, Tesnime
N1 - Funding Information:
This article is independent research funded by the NIHR (NIHR200605). We would like to thank Nigel Henderson who helped facilitate the completion of Recovery College surveys in Scotland. We thank the RECOLLECT Lived Experience Advisory Panel who provided input into the design of the survey and interpretation of results. MS acknowledges the support of NIHR Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license
PY - 2023/10/1
Y1 - 2023/10/1
N2 - Background: Recovery colleges were developed in England to support the recovery of individuals who have mental health symptoms or mental illness. They have been founded in many countries but there has been little international research on recovery colleges and no studies investigating their staffing, fidelity, or costs. We aimed to characterise recovery colleges internationally, to understand organisational and student characteristics, fidelity, and budget. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, we identified all countries in which recovery colleges exist. We repeated a cross-sectional survey done in England for recovery colleges in 28 countries. In both surveys, recovery colleges were defined as services that supported personal recovery, that were coproduced with students and staff, and where students learned collaboratively with trainers. Recovery college managers completed the survey. The survey included questions about organisational and student characteristics, fidelity to the RECOLLECT Fidelity Measure, funding models, and unit costs. Recovery colleges were grouped by country and continent and presented descriptively. We used regression models to explore continental differences in fidelity, using England as the reference group. Findings: We identified 221 recovery colleges operating across 28 countries, in five continents. Overall, 174 (79%) of 221 recovery colleges participated. Most recovery colleges scored highly on fidelity. Overall scores for fidelity (β=–2·88, 95% CI 4·44 to –1·32; p=0·0001), coproduction (odds ratio [OR] 0·10, 95% CI 0·03 to 0·33; p<0·0001), and being tailored to the student (OR 0·10, 0·02 to 0·39; p=0·0010), were lower for recovery colleges in Asia than in England. No other significant differences were identified between recovery colleges in England, and those in other continents where recovery colleges were present. 133 recovery colleges provided data on annual budgets, which ranged from €0 to €2 550 000, varying extensively within and between continents. From included data, all annual budgets reported by the college added up to €30 million, providing 19 864 courses for 55 161 students. Interpretation: Recovery colleges exist in many countries. There is an international consensus on key operating principles, especially equality and a commitment to recovery, and most recovery colleges achieve moderate to high fidelity to the original model, irrespective of the income band of their country. Cultural differences need to be considered in assessing coproduction and approaches to individualising support. Funding: National Institute for Health and Care Research.
AB - Background: Recovery colleges were developed in England to support the recovery of individuals who have mental health symptoms or mental illness. They have been founded in many countries but there has been little international research on recovery colleges and no studies investigating their staffing, fidelity, or costs. We aimed to characterise recovery colleges internationally, to understand organisational and student characteristics, fidelity, and budget. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, we identified all countries in which recovery colleges exist. We repeated a cross-sectional survey done in England for recovery colleges in 28 countries. In both surveys, recovery colleges were defined as services that supported personal recovery, that were coproduced with students and staff, and where students learned collaboratively with trainers. Recovery college managers completed the survey. The survey included questions about organisational and student characteristics, fidelity to the RECOLLECT Fidelity Measure, funding models, and unit costs. Recovery colleges were grouped by country and continent and presented descriptively. We used regression models to explore continental differences in fidelity, using England as the reference group. Findings: We identified 221 recovery colleges operating across 28 countries, in five continents. Overall, 174 (79%) of 221 recovery colleges participated. Most recovery colleges scored highly on fidelity. Overall scores for fidelity (β=–2·88, 95% CI 4·44 to –1·32; p=0·0001), coproduction (odds ratio [OR] 0·10, 95% CI 0·03 to 0·33; p<0·0001), and being tailored to the student (OR 0·10, 0·02 to 0·39; p=0·0010), were lower for recovery colleges in Asia than in England. No other significant differences were identified between recovery colleges in England, and those in other continents where recovery colleges were present. 133 recovery colleges provided data on annual budgets, which ranged from €0 to €2 550 000, varying extensively within and between continents. From included data, all annual budgets reported by the college added up to €30 million, providing 19 864 courses for 55 161 students. Interpretation: Recovery colleges exist in many countries. There is an international consensus on key operating principles, especially equality and a commitment to recovery, and most recovery colleges achieve moderate to high fidelity to the original model, irrespective of the income band of their country. Cultural differences need to be considered in assessing coproduction and approaches to individualising support. Funding: National Institute for Health and Care Research.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85171459247&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S2215-0366(23)00229-8
DO - 10.1016/S2215-0366(23)00229-8
M3 - Article
C2 - 37739003
AN - SCOPUS:85171459247
SN - 2215-0366
VL - 10
SP - 768
EP - 779
JO - The Lancet Psychiatry
JF - The Lancet Psychiatry
IS - 10
ER -