How Should We Study Residential Recovery Homes?

The role of recovery housing during outpatient substance use treatment

BACKGROUND

Recovery housing generally refers to alcohol- and drug-free living environments that provide peer support for those wanting to initiate and sustain recovery from alcohol and other drug (AOD) disorders. Despite a growing evidence base for recovery housing, relatively little research has focused on how recovery housing may benefit individuals accessing outpatient substance use treatment.

METHODS

Using administrative and qualitative data from individuals attending an outpatient substance use treatment program in the Midwestern United States that provides recovery housing in a structured sober living environment, this mixed methods study sought to: (1) determine whether individuals who opted to live in structured sober living during outpatient treatment (N = 138) differed from those who did not (N = 842) on demographic, clinical, or service use characteristics; (2) examine whether living in structured sober living was associated with greater likelihood of satisfactory discharge and longer lengths of stay in outpatient treatment; and (3) explore what individuals (N = 7) who used the structured sober living during outpatient treatment were hoping to gain from the experience.

RESULTS

Factors associated with the use of recovery housing during outpatient treatment in multivariate models included gender, age, and receiving more services across episodes of care. Living in structured sober housing was associated with greater likelihood of satisfactory discharge and longer length of stays in outpatient treatment. Focus group participants reported needing additional structure and recovery support, with many noting that structure and accountability, learning and practicing life, coping, and other recovery skills, as well as receiving social and emotional support from others were particularly beneficial aspects of the sober living environment.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings underscore the importance of safe and supportive housing during outpatient substance use treatment as well as the need for future research on how housing environments may affect engagement, retention, and outcomes among individuals accessing outpatient substance use treatment.

Understanding challenges for recovery homes during COVID-19

Understanding the effects of COVID-19 mitigation for persons in group living environments is of critical importance to limiting the spread of the virus. In the U.S., residential recovery homes for persons with alcohol and drug disorders are good examples of high-risk environments where virus mitigation procedures are essential. The National Alliance for Recovery Residences (NARR) has taken recommendations developed by the Center for Disease Control (CDC) and applied them to recovery home settings. This paper describes how COVID-19 mitigation efforts in recovery homes may be influenced by two factors. First, while some houses are licensed by states with rigorous health and safety standards, others are not licensed and are subject to less oversight. These homes may be more inconsistent in adhering to mitigation standards. Second, to varying degrees, recovery homes use a social model approach to recovery that contrasts with mitigation procedures such as social distancing and stay-at-home orders. This paper provides examples of ways recovery homes have been forced to adjust to the competing demands of mitigation efforts and social model recovery. The paper also identifies multiple questions that could be addressed by provider-researcher coalitions to inform how social model recovery can navigate forward during the era of COVID-19. As we move forward during the era of COVID-19, providers are encouraged to remember that recovery homes have a history of resilience facing adversity and in fact have their origins in grassroots responses to the challenges of their times.

Housing Status, Psychiatric Symptoms, and Substance Abuse Outcomes Among Sober Living House Residents over 18 Months

Studies show individuals entering sober living recovery houses (SLHs) make significant, sustained improvement on measures of substance abuse problems, employment, and arrests. The current study assessed changes in housing status among SLH residents over 18 months and the relative influences of housing status and psychiatric distress on substance abuse outcomes. Two hundred forty one men and 58 women, all age 18 and older, were interviewed within their first week of entering 20 SLHs and again at 6-, 12-, and 18-month follow-up. Between entry into the SLHs and 18-month follow-up homelessness declined from 16% to 4%, marginal housing declined from 66% to 46%, and stable housing increased from 13% to 27%. Psychiatric severity was generally mild to moderate in severity, but nevertheless showed improvement over the 18-month study period. Multivariate models showed worse substance abuse outcomes for residents with higher psychiatric distress and unstable housing. Relative to persons with stable housing, those who were homeless or marginally housed had worse outcomes and those in SLHs had better outcomes. Overall, we conclude that individuals entering SLHs show improvement in housing status and psychiatric distress, both of which are associated with better substance abuse outcomes.

Benefits of peer support groups in the treatment of addiction

Objective

Peer support can be defined as the process of giving and receiving nonprofessional, nonclinical assistance from individuals with similar conditions or circumstances to achieve long-term recovery from psychiatric, alcohol, and/or other drug-related problems. Recently, there has been a dramatic rise in the adoption of alternative forms of peer support services to assist recovery from substance use disorders; however, often peer support has not been separated out as a formalized intervention component and rigorously empirically tested, making it difficult to determine its effects. This article reports the results of a literature review that was undertaken to assess the effects of peer support groups, one aspect of peer support services, in the treatment of addiction.

Methods

The authors of this article searched electronic databases of relevant peer-reviewed research literature including PubMed and MedLINE.

Results

Ten studies met our minimum inclusion criteria, including randomized controlled trials or pre-/post-data studies, adult participants, inclusion of group format, substance use-related, and US-conducted studies published in 1999 or later. Studies demonstrated associated benefits in the following areas: 1) substance use, 2) treatment engagement, 3) human immunodeficiency virus/hepatitis C virus risk behaviors, and 4) secondary substance-related behaviors such as craving and self-efficacy. Limitations were noted on the relative lack of rigorously tested empirical studies within the literature and inability to disentangle the effects of the group treatment that is often included as a component of other services.

Conclusion

Peer support groups included in addiction treatment shows much promise; however, the limited data relevant to this topic diminish the ability to draw definitive conclusions. More rigorous research is needed in this area to further expand on this important line of research.

Course of Psychiatric Symptoms and Abstinence among Methamphetamine-Dependent Persons in Sober Living Recovery Homes

BACKGROUND

Although studies of co-occurring psychiatric disorders among methamphetamine (MA)-dependent persons have been conducted in treatment programs, none have examined them in service settings used to sustain long-term recovery, such as sober living houses (SLHs).

METHODS

Residents entering SLHs (N = 243) were interviewed within two weeks and at 6-, 12-, and 18-month follow-up. Measures assessed psychiatric symptoms using the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI), past-year drug and alcohol dependence, and abstinence over six-month time periods.

RESULTS

Overall, severity of psychiatric symptoms on the BSI was similar among MA-dependent and other dependent residents. Global psychiatric severity, depression, and somatization scales on the BSI predicted abstinence for both groups. However, phobic anxiety and hostility scales were associated with abstinence for MA-dependent residents but not for those dependent on other substances.

CONCLUSION

The similarity of psychiatric symptoms among persons with and without MA dependence in SLHs is different from what studies have found in treatment programs. The association between psychiatric symptoms and abstinence for both groups suggests SLHs should consider provision of on- or off-site mental health services. Additional research is needed to understand why phobic anxiety and hostility are associated with abstinence among MA-dependent residents but not those dependent on other substances.

Challenges and Rewards of Conducting Research on Recovery Residences for Alcohol and Drug Disorders

Although research shows treatment for alcohol and drug problems can be effective, persons without stable housing that supports recovery are at risk for relapse. Recovery residences (RRs) for drug and alcohol problems are a growing response to the need for alcohol- and drug-free living environments that support sustained recovery. Research on RRs offers an opportunity to examine how integration of these individuals into a supportive, empowering environment has beneficial impacts on substance use, housing, and other outcomes, as well as benefits for the surrounding community. Research can also lead to the identification of operations and practices within houses that maximize favorable outcomes for residents. However, research on RRs also presents significant obstacles and challenges. Based on our experiences conducting recovery home research for decades, we present suggestions for addressing some of the unique challenges encountered in this type of research.

Co-occurring Substance Abuse and Mental Health Problems among Homeless Persons: Suggestions for Research and Practice

Communities throughout the U.S. are struggling to find solutions for serious and persistent homelessness. Alcohol and drug problems can be causes and consequences of homelessness, as well as co-occurring problems that complicate efforts to succeed in finding stable housing. Two prominent service models exist, one known as "Housing First" takes a harm reduction approach and the other known as the "linear" model typically supports a goal of abstinence from alcohol and drugs. Despite their popularity, the research supporting these models suffers from methodological problems and inconsistent findings. One purpose of this paper is to describe systematic reviews of the homelessness services literature, which illustrate weaknesses in research designs and inconsistent conclusions about the effectiveness of current models. Problems among some of the seminal studies on homelessness include poorly defined inclusion and exclusion criteria, inadequate measures of alcohol and drug use, unspecified or poorly implemented comparison conditions, and lack of procedures documenting adherence to service models. Several recent papers have suggested broader based approaches for homeless services that integrate alternatives and respond better to consumer needs. Practical considerations for implementing a broader system of services are described and peer managed recovery homes are presented as examples of services that address some of the gaps in current approaches. Three issues are identified that need more attention from researchers: 1) improving upon the methodological limitations in current studies, 2) assessing the impact of broader based, integrated services on outcome, and 3) assessing approaches to the service needs of homeless persons involved in the criminal justice system.