Training professionals in a recovery-oriented methodology: A mixed method evaluation

N.A. Bitter*, D.P.K. Roeg, C. van Nieuwenhuizen, J. van Weeghel

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

7 Citations (Scopus)


Several studies have reported difficulties concerning the implementation of recovery-oriented interventions. In this study, the effect of training in the Comprehensive Approach to Rehabilitation (CARe) on daily practice was evaluated. Additionally, we aimed to acquire insight into the experiences with the implementation process involving professionals, management and trainers.

Fourteen teams for sheltered and supported housing in the Netherlands participated in this study. As part of a cluster-randomised controlled trial (RCT) design, eight teams received training in the CARe methodology. Model fidelity (using the CARe fidelity audit) and professionals' knowledge of recovery (using the Recovery Knowledge Inventory) were measured for all teams until 20 months after the start. Afterwards, an evaluation meeting with participating stakeholders was organised in which barriers and facilitators of the implementation of the CARe methodology were inventoried.

Ten months after the training, the intervention teams scored higher than the control teams on the fidelity subscales: 'recovery', 'strengths orientation' and 'amount of training and coaching'. Twenty months after the training, only the effect of 'amount of coaching and training' remained. Additionally, 'methodological working' clearly differed between the groups after 20 months in favour of the intervention teams. In all teams, model fidelity was moderate at both measurements. The knowledge of recovery of the trained teams was slightly and significantly higher at 10 and 20 months after training. Although professionals were positive about recovery and strength-oriented working, they experienced several organisational and societal barriers.

Training in the CARe methodology improved the fidelity and knowledge of recovery among professionals. However, the differences were small, and fidelity decreased over time. More in-depth knowledge is needed on which barriers professionals experience in practice so that tailored training and implementation strategies can be developed. Furthermore, more attention is needed for professional development and the translation of theory into practice.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)457-466
JournalScandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 2019


  • CARE
  • IPS
  • implementation
  • mental health care
  • model fidelity
  • recovery-oriented care
  • rehabilitation


Dive into the research topics of 'Training professionals in a recovery-oriented methodology: A mixed method evaluation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this