Measuring recovery capital for people recovering from alcohol and drug addiction: A systematic review.

Background: Recovery capital theory provides a biopsychosocial framework for identifying and measuring strengths and barriers that can be targeted to support recovery from alcohol and drug addiction. This systematic review analyzed and synthesized all quantitative approaches that have measured recovery capital since 2016. Method: Three databases were searched to identify studies published from 2016 to 2023. Eligible studies explicitly stated they measured recovery capital in participants recovering from alcohol and/or drug addiction. Studies focusing on other forms of addiction were excluded. Results: Sixty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Forty-six studies used one of the ten identified recovery capital questionnaires, and twenty-five studies used a measurement approach other than one of the ten recovery capital questionnaires. The ten recovery capital questionnaires are primarily developed for adult populations across clinical and community recovery settings, and between them measure 41 separate recovery capital constructs. They are generally considered valid and reliable measures of recovery capital. Nevertheless, a strong evidence base on the psychometric properties across diverse populations and settings still needs to be established for these questionnaires. Conclusion: The development of recovery capital questionnaires has been a significant advance in the field of addiction recovery, in alignment with the emerging recovery-oriented approach to addiction recovery care. Additionally, the non-recovery capital questionnaire-based approaches to recovery capital measurement have an important place in the field. They could be used alongside recovery capital questionnaires to test theory, and in contexts where the application of the questionnaires is not feasible, such as analyses of data from online recovery forums.

Assessing a pilot scheme of intensive support and assertive linkage in levels of engagement, retention, and recovery capital for people in recovery housing using quasi-experimental methods.

INTRODUCTION: Strong and ever-growing evidence highlights the effectiveness of recovery housing in supporting and sustaining substance use disorder (SUD) recovery, especially when augmented by intensive support that includes assertive linkages to community services. This study aims to evaluate a pilot intensive recovery support (IRS) intervention for individuals (n = 175) entering certified Level II and III recovery residences. These individuals met at least three out of five conditions (no health insurance; no driving license; substance use in the last 14 days; current unemployment; possession of less than $75 capital). The study assesses the impact of the IRS on engagement, retention, and changes in recovery capital, compared to the business-as-usual Standard Recovery Support (SRS) approach (n = 1758). METHODS: The study employed quasi-experimental techniques to create weighted and balanced counterfactual groups. These groups, derived from the Recovery Capital assessment tool (REC-CAP), enabled comparison of outcomes between people receiving IRS and those undergoing SRS. RESULTS: After reweighting for resident demographics, service needs, and barriers to recovery, those receiving IRS exhibited improved retention rates, reduced likelihood of disengagement, and growth in recovery capital after living in the residence for 6-9 months. CONCLUSION: The results from this pilot intervention indicate that intensive recovery support, which integrates assertive community linkages and enhanced recovery coaching, outperforms a balanced counterfactual group in engagement, length of stay, and recovery capital growth. We suggest that this model may be particularly beneficial to those entering Level II and Level III recovery housing with lower levels of recovery capital at admission.

Associations of Menstrual Cycle and Progesterone-to-Estradiol Ratio With Alcohol Consumption in Alcohol Use Disorder: A Sex-Separated Multicenter Longitudinal Study.

OBJECTIVE: Alcohol use disorder (AUD) constitutes a critical public health issue and has sex-specific characteristics. Initial evidence suggests that progesterone and estradiol might reduce or increase alcohol intake, respectively. However, there is a need for a better understanding of how the menstrual cycle in females and the ratio of progesterone to estradiol in females and males influence alcohol use patterns in individuals with AUD. METHODS: In this sex-separated multicenter longitudinal study, the authors analyzed 12-month data on real-life alcohol use (from 21,460 smartphone entries), menstrual cycle, and serum progesterone-to-estradiol ratios (from 667 blood samples at four individual study visits) in 74 naturally cycling females and 278 males with AUD between 2020 and 2022, using generalized and general linear mixed modeling. RESULTS: Menstrual cycle phases were significantly associated with binge drinking and progesterone-to-estradiol ratio. During the late luteal phase, females showed a lower predicted binge drinking probability of 13% and a higher predicted marginal mean of progesterone-to-estradiol ratio of 95 compared with during the menstrual, follicular, and ovulatory phases (binge drinking probability and odds ratios vs. late luteal phase, respectively: 17%, odds ratio=1.340, 95% CI=1.031, 1.742; 19%, odds ratio=1.523, 95% CI=1.190, 1.949; and 20%, odds ratio=1.683, 95% CI=1.285, 2.206; difference in progesterone-to-estradiol ratios, respectively: -61, 95% CI=-105.492, -16.095; -78, 95% CI=-119.322, -37.039; and -71, 95% CI=-114.568, -27.534). In males, a higher progesterone-to-estradiol ratio was related to lower probabilities of binge drinking and of any alcohol use, with a 10-unit increase in the hormone ratio resulting in odds ratios of 0.918 (95% CI=0.843, 0.999) and 0.914 (95% CI=0.845, 0.988), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: These ecologically valid findings suggest that high progesterone-to-estradiol ratios can have a protective effect against problematic alcohol use in females and males with AUD, highlighting the progesterone-to-estradiol ratio as a promising treatment target. Moreover, the results indicate that females with AUD may benefit from menstrual cycle phase-tailored treatments.