The purpose of this website is to help share the resources from our healthy lifestyle focused research. We are very keen for people to use our programs and research as part of their routine care. For example, all of the program materials for Healthy Recovery can be downloaded from this website here. If you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to contact us.
Blog
Better Health Choices article published.
Addictive Behaviours have just published our article titled: “Better Health Choices: feasability and preliminary effectiveness of a peer delivered healthy lifestyle intervention in a community mental health setting”. This research was conducted in collaboration with NEAMI National. Its free to download from here. I think just for a few more weeks. Just email me when the links stops working.
Abstract
Background
To reduce smoking and improve other health behaviours of people living with severe mental illness, healthy lifestyle interventions have been recommended. One approach to improving the availability of these types of interventions is to utilise the mental health peer workforce. The current study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of peer-workers facilitating a telephone delivered healthy lifestyle intervention within community based mental health settings. The study also examined preliminary outcomes of the intervention.
Methods
The study was conducted as a randomised controlled feasibility trial. In addition to treatment as usual, participants randomised to the Treatment Condition were offered BHC. This was an 8-session telephone delivered coaching intervention that encouraged participants to decrease their smoking, increase their intake of fruit and vegetables, and reduce their leisure screen time. Participants in the waitlist Control Condition continued to complete treatment as usual. All participants were engaged with Neami National, an Australian community mental health organisation. Peer-workers were also current employees of Neami National.
Results
Forty-three participants were recruited. The average number of sessions completed by participants in the Treatment Condition was 5.7 (SD = 2.6; out of 8-sessions). Seventeen participants (77%) completed at least half of the sessions, and nine participants (40%) completed all eight sessions. Participant satisfaction was high, with all participants followed up rating the quality of the service they received as ‘good’ or ‘excellent’. When compared to the Control Condition, people in the Treatment Condition demonstrated greater treatment effects on smoking and leisure screen time. There was only a negligible effect on servings of fruit and vegetable.
Conclusions
Results were promising regarding the feasibility of peer-workers delivering BHC. Good retention rates and high consumer satisfaction ratings in the Treatment Condition demonstrated that peer-workers were capable of delivering the intervention to the extent that consumers found it beneficial. The current results suggest that a sufficiently powered, peer delivered randomised controlled trial of BHC is warranted.
Study registration
Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR; Trial ID ACTRN123615000564550).
Predicting intention to use nicotine replacement therapy in people attending residential substance abuse treatment
Our group has just published a new article on the use of NRT in alcohol and other drug treatment. You can download the article from here. I think this link is only available for a short period of time. Just email me if the link has expired: pkelly@uow.edu.au
Here is the abstract:
Objective: Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) is recommended as a frontline smoking cessation tool for people attending mental health and substance dependence treatment services. Previous research suggests that NRT is underutilized in these settings. To improve the use of NRT among people attending residential treatment for substance use disorders, it is important that the factors influencing smokers’ decisions to use NRT are understood. The study aimed to examine (1) smoking cessation strategies used by participants in previous quit attempts, (2) participants’ attitudes toward NRT (i.e., safety concerns and perceived efficacy), and (3) the predictors of participants’ intention to use NRT to support future quit attempts. Methods: Participants completed a cross-sectional survey that examined their smoking behaviors, previous experiences using smoking cessation strategies, attitudes and beliefs regarding NRT, and intention to use NRT as part of future quit attempts (N= 218). All participants were attending residential treatment for substance use disorders provided by We Help Ourselves, a large provider of specialist alcohol and other drug treatment in Australia. Results: The majority of respondents (98%) reported that they had smoked regularly in their lifetime, and 89% were current smokers. Forty-five percent of the current smokers reported that they had previously used NRT to support a quit attempt, with 54% reporting that they intended to use NRT to support a future quit attempt. Intentions to use NRT were not related to the participants’ mental health status or the participants’ perceptions regarding the safety or potential drawbacks associated with using NRT. However, participants were more likely to report that they would use NRT to support future quit attempts if they were female, had previously used NRT, and perceived NRT to be effective. Conclusions:Improving the use of evidence-based smoking cessation strategies within substance use treatment continues to be a priority. To enhance the use of NRT among consumers attending mental health and addiction treatment services, NRT should be universally offered. Future research should consider strategies that help to improve participants’ positive perceptions regarding the efficacy of NRT.
Healthy Recovery 