IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/socpsy/v60y2014i2p162-168.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Psychometric evaluation of the Dutch version of the Mental Health Recovery Measure (MHRM)

Author

Listed:
  • Chijs van Nieuwenhuizen
  • Greet Wilrycx
  • Mozhgan Moradi
  • Evelien Brouwers

Abstract

Background: During the past decade, the mental health consumer movement has drawn the attention of mental health providers, researchers and policy makers to the concept of recovery. Traditionally, recovery primarily refers to the remission of symptoms. Nowadays, recovery is also regarded in a sense that all individuals, even those with severe psychiatric disabilities, can improve. Accordingly, recovery for people with severe mental illness refers to hope and optimism, empowerment, regained control and increased self-esteem, illness self-management and engagement in meaningful daily activities (Corrigan, Giffort, Rashid, Leary & Okeke, 1999; Jacobson & Greenley, 2001; Leamy, Bird, le Boutillier, Williams & Slade, 2011; van Gestel-Timmermans, Brouwers, van Assen, Bongers & van Nieuwenhuizen, 2012). Little empirical research, however, has been done and instruments to measure recovery are scarce. Aims: In the current study, the psychometric properties of the Dutch version of the Mental Health Recovery Measure (MHRM) are explored. Convergent and divergent validity of the MHRM was assessed using standardized measures of hope (Hope Herth Index (HHI)), recovery-promoting professional competence (Recovery Promoting Relationships Scale (RPRS)) and general physical health and well-being (RAND Measure of Health-Related Quality of Life (RAND-36)). Methods: A factor analysis was conducted and Cronbach’s α of the MHRM scales was assessed. The construct validity was assessed by computing the intercorrelations of the MHRM, HHI, RPRS and RAND-36. Results: Data were available for 212 patients: 70 patients completed the MHRM, HHI and RAND 36 and 142 filled out the MHRM and RPRS. Exploratory factor analysis resulted in an interpretable three-factor solution. Cronbach’s α ranged from 0.86 to 0.94. The convergent validity of the instrument was satisfactory; the divergent validity was less clear. Conclusions: This study offers evidence to suggest that the Dutch version of the MHRM is a reliable measure (in terms of internal consistency) with a generally acceptable convergent and divergent validity. Further research is needed to clarify the extent to which the MHRM is sensitive enough to capture the individual recovery process of patients.

Suggested Citation

  • Chijs van Nieuwenhuizen & Greet Wilrycx & Mozhgan Moradi & Evelien Brouwers, 2014. "Psychometric evaluation of the Dutch version of the Mental Health Recovery Measure (MHRM)," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 60(2), pages 162-168, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:socpsy:v:60:y:2014:i:2:p:162-168
    DOI: 10.1177/0020764012472302
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0020764012472302
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0020764012472302?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ulla-Karin Schön & Anne Denhov & Alain Topor, 2009. "Social Relationships as a Decisive Factor in Recovering From Severe Mental Illness," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 55(4), pages 336-347, July.
    2. Gavin Weeks & Mike Slade & Mark Hayward, 2011. "A UK validation of the Stages of Recovery Instrument," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 57(5), pages 446-454, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yvonne Stolk & Katherine Sevar & Nga Tran & Serafino G Mancuso & Prem Chopra & David Castle, 2015. "A comparative study of the economic and social functioning of Vietnamese-Australians with low English proficiency living with psychotic illness," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 61(4), pages 319-329, June.
    2. Anne Denhov & Alain Topor, 2012. "The components of helping relationships with professionals in psychiatry: Users’ perspective," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 58(4), pages 417-424, July.
    3. Ann J Sheridan & Jonathan Drennan & Barbara Coughlan & Donal O’Keeffe & Kate Frazer & Mary Kemple & Denise Alexander & Frances Howlin & Anne Fahy & Veronica Kow & Eadbhard O’Callaghan, 2015. "Improving social functioning and reducing social isolation and loneliness among people with enduring mental illness: Report of a randomised controlled trial of supported socialisation," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 61(3), pages 241-250, May.
    4. Samson Tse & Larry Davidson & Ka-fai Chung & Chong Ho Yu & King Lam Ng & Emily Tsoi, 2015. "Logistic regression analysis of psychosocial correlates associated with recovery from schizophrenia in a Chinese community," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 61(1), pages 50-57, February.
    5. Bernadette AM Cullen & Ramin Mojtabai & Elahe Bordbar & Anita Everett & Katie L Nugent & William W Eaton, 2017. "Social network, recovery attitudes and internal stigma among those with serious mental illness," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 63(5), pages 448-458, August.
    6. Deborah Windell & Ross MG Norman, 2013. "A qualitative analysis of influences on recovery following a first episode of psychosis," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 59(5), pages 493-500, August.
    7. Greet Wilrycx & Marcel Croon & Anneloes Van den Broek & Chijs van Nieuwenhuizen, 2015. "Evaluation of a recovery-oriented care training program for mental healthcare professionals: Effects on mental health consumer outcomes," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 61(2), pages 164-173, March.
    8. Sara Fernández-Aguayo & Margarita Pino-Juste, 2023. "Sustainable Health and Wellness: Effectiveness of a Drama Therapy Program to Improve the Wellbeing of People Affected by Mental Health Decline," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-15, August.
    9. Yulia Kartalova-O’Doherty & Donna Tedstone Doherty, 2011. "Recovering from mental health problems: Perceived positive and negative effects of medication on reconnecting with life," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 57(6), pages 610-618, November.
    10. J. A. W. M. van Gestel-Timmermans & E. P. M. Brouwers & I. L. Bongers & M. A. L. M. van Assen & Ch. van Nieuwenhuizen, 2012. "Profiles of individually defined recovery of people with major psychiatric problems," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 58(5), pages 521-531, September.
    11. Linda Denise Oakley & Jonathan W. Kanter & Janette Y. Taylor & Marilyn Duguid, 2012. "The self-stigma of depression for women," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 58(5), pages 512-520, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:socpsy:v:60:y:2014:i:2:p:162-168. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.