Two multisite studies on Recovery Colleges in England

Introduction

Existing research on the benefits of Recovery Colleges for people who use specialist mental health services covers a small proportion of Recovery Colleges, and many are from single sites using uncontrolled cross-sectional or pre-post designs. No formal economic evaluation of Recovery Colleges exists, and costing studies have focused on the impact on service use, rather than wider potential economic effects, such as employment.

 

Methods

1) An uncontrolled multisite prospective cohort study (target n=625) 2) A controlled multisite prospective cohort study (target n=660).

 

Results

As these studies are ongoing, we will present methodological issues and how we have approached them, rather than results. Challenges with recruiting new service user students include the eligibility criteria of some Recovery Colleges; the rate at which they attract new students; the registration process; and students’ willingness to disclose to staff that they use services and are therefore eligible. Recruitment of controls is influenced by the number of National Health Service mental health service providers with Recovery Colleges and the requisite IT infrastructure, and whether they have a process for advance consent to be contacted about research.

 

Discussion

Our study highlights the potential for multisite quasi-experimental designs when randomisation is not possible. However, the research and development infrastructure for this is only partially developed such that this potential cannot yet be fully realised.

 

Conclusion

The fidelity measure and the data gained concerning the fidelity-outcome relationship from the uncontrolled study can facilitate an empirically-based approach to the development of Recovery Colleges, to maximise benefits for students. The controlled study will also provide the first rigorous evidence on the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of Recovery Colleges, to inform their prioritising, commissioning, and running.