R10d. Literaturübersichten und Übersichtsartikel zur Peer-Begleitung in Suchterkrankungen und/oder psychischer Gesundheit

This systematic review identifies, appraises, and summarizes the evidence on the effectiveness of peer-delivered recovery support services for people in recovery from alcohol and drug addiction. Nine studies met criteria for inclusion in the review. They were assessed for quality and outcomes including substance use and recovery-related factors. Despite significant methodological limitations found in the included studies, the body of evidence suggests salutary effects on participants. Current limitations and recommendations for future research are discussed.

OBJECTIVE: This review assessed the level of evidence and effectiveness of peer support services delivered by individuals in recovery to those with serious mental illnesses or co-occurring mental and substance use disorders. METHODS: Authors searched PubMed, PsycINFO, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, Sociological Abstracts, Social Services Abstracts, Published International Literature on Traumatic Stress, the Educational Resources Information Center, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature for outcome studies of peer support services from 1995 through 2012. They found 20 studies across three service types: peers added to traditional services, peers in existing clinical roles, and peers delivering structured curricula. Authors judged the methodological quality of the studies using three levels of evidence (high, moderate, and low). They also described the evidence of service effectiveness. RESULTS: The level of evidence for each type of peer support service was moderate. Many studies had methodological shortcomings, and outcome measures varied. The effectiveness varied by service type. Across the range of methodological rigor, a majority of studies of two service types--peers added and peers delivering curricula--showed some improvement favoring peers. Compared with professional staff, peers were better able to reduce inpatient use and improve a range of recovery outcomes, although one study found a negative impact. Effectiveness of peers in existing clinical roles was mixed. CONCLUSIONS: Peer support services have demonstrated many notable outcomes. However, studies that better differentiate the contributions of the peer role and are conducted with greater specificity, consistency, and rigor would strengthen the evidence.

Ce rapport canadien (CMHA Waterloo Wellington, 2018) passe en revue la littérature et deux groupes de discussion sur la supervision des pairs aidants professionnels intégrés dans des services de santé mentale et d’addictions à dominante clinique. Il identifie trois défis récurrents : une mise en œuvre souvent mal préparée, un manque de clarté de rôle, et l’isolement professionnel des pairs aidants. La supervision y est présentée comme un levier essentiel pour prévenir l’épuisement, la cooptation et la dérive vers un rôle de clinicien junior. Les auteurs soulignent que les superviseurs — le plus souvent des professionnels de santé sans expérience vécue — manquent fréquemment de formation spécifique au soutien par les pairs, et plaident pour un dispositif différencié : une supervision administrative assurée par l’organisation d’accueil, complétée par une supervision de pratique confiée à une organisation pair-experte externe, permettant au pair aidant de maintenir son ancrage dans les valeurs de l’expérience vécue.

BACKGROUND: Peer support has long featured in substance abuse treatment. A recent international shift has taken place toward a recovery-orientated approach to treatment which promotes the incorporation of peer support workers and thus highlighting the need for evidence-based knowledge in this area. METHOD: A systematic literature review was conducted using ProQuest and Ebsco databases, Academic Search Premier, PsycARTICLES, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, PsycINFO. The search terms included peer support (and related terms) and lived experience (and related terms) and addiction (and related terms). Reference lists and personal referrals to specific papers were also incorporated.Results: A total of 618 papers were identified. Of that total, 24 papers were selected as relevant through reflecting on the stated aim of the review. CONCLUSION: Benefits and challenges where identified as co-existing within the peer support work role. The results of the literature review indicate benefits of increased confidence, stability, structure, income, and an opportunity to gain workplace skills. The challenges identified are integration into the workplace, triggers, and unclear job descriptions and boundaries. A gap in the literature has been revealed with regards to peer support workers in substance abuse treatment services and how their role impacts their recovery.

Ovid MEDLINE(R) <2020>

Legislators and health systems have recently begun to explore the use of peer mentors as part of hospital-based addiction teams. Integrating peers into hospitals is a complex undertaking still in its infancy. Peers’ lived experience of addiction and its consequences, combined with their distance from medical culture and hierarchy, is at the core of their power - and creates inherent challenges in integrating peers into hospital settings. Successful integration of peers in hospitals has unique challenges for individual providers, health systems, and the peers themselves. We have included peers as part of a hospital-based addiction medicine team at our hospital since 2015. In this article, we outline some unique challenges, share lessons learned, and provide recommendations for integrating peers into hospital-based SUD care. Challenges include the rigid professional hierarchy of hospitals which contrasts with peers’ role, which is built on shared life experience and relationship; different expectations regarding professional boundaries and sharing personal information; the intensity of the hospital environment; and, illness severity of hospitalized people which can be emotionally draining and increase peers’ own risk for relapse. Recommendations focus on establishing a way to finance the peer program, clearly defining the peer role, creating a home base within hospital settings, creating a collaborative and structured process for hiring and retaining peers, identifying peers who are likely to succeed, providing initial and ongoing training to peers that extends beyond typical peer certification, ways to introduce peer program to hospital staff, and providing regular, meaningful supervision. We hope that our recommendations help other hospital systems capitalize on the practical lessons learned from our experience.

Hospitals are increasingly filled with people admitted for medical and surgical complications of substance use disorder (SUD). Hospitalization can be a reachable  moment to engage and initiate SUD care. Yet most hospitals do not have systems in  place to adequately address addiction, and most providers have little to no  addiction training. There is widespread need for protocols and tools to implement  hospital-based SUD care. We share best practices from our hospital-based  Improving Addiction Care Team (IMPACT). We include a description of  interprofessional roles (medical providers, social workers, peers with lived  experience in recovery) and include detailed appendices of practical tools such  as medication protocols (eg, buprenorphine induction), risk assessments (eg,  outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy) and treatment tools (eg, a patient  safety care plan to manage patient and staff expectations surrounding risks for  in hospital drug use). A case example illustrates how IMPACT works and how tools  can be applied. We hope other hospitals can adapt and integrate these tools to  support widespread implementation of hospital-based SUD care.

BACKGROUND: Recovery from a substance use disorder involves various supports addressing multiple interrelated factors. Recovery capital (RC) is a lens that could help identify distinct areas of assets that could be enhanced and barriers to be addressed in individuals’ recovery processes. The aim of this study is to conduct a systematic review of the literature to map the existing RC research and theoretical evidence base and to provide readers and potential users of the construct areas for further attention. METHODS: Using systematic search methods, a literature search on RC was conducted. Articles were reviewed and relevant data was extracted and synthesized. RESULTS: Searches resulted in 38 reports representing 35 unique studies. Samples ranged from 4–703 participants (4885 total) and were described as male (M = 60.9%) and white (M = 72.1%). Sample age ranged 17.3–70 years (37.2 ± 64.61 years). RC has been studied in a range of diverse adult populations and many factors have been studied within its primary domains. Yet, authors are inconsistent in their use and reporting of RC conceptualization and efforts to quantify RC through a scale have not been rewarded with uptake in the research community. CONCLUSIONS: Future researchers should consistently use key RC domains. Measurements of RC largely lack attention to community-level factors and should be further explored. RC should also be explored among specific populations, especially among youth and with particular attention to culture and intersectionality.

OBJECTIVE: This review assessed the level of evidence and effectiveness of peer support services delivered by individuals in recovery to those with serious mental illnesses or co-occurring mental and substance use disorders. METHODS: Authors searched PubMed, PsycINFO, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, Sociological Abstracts, Social Services Abstracts, Published International Literature on Traumatic Stress, the Educational Resources Information Center, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature for outcome studies of peer support services from 1995 through 2012. They found 20 studies across three service types: peers added to traditional services, peers in existing clinical roles, and peers delivering structured curricula. Authors judged the methodological quality of the studies using three levels of evidence (high, moderate, and low). They also described the evidence of service effectiveness. RESULTS: The level of evidence for each type of peer support service was moderate. Many studies had methodological shortcomings, and outcome measures varied. The effectiveness varied by service type. Across the range of methodological rigor, a majority of studies of two service types—peers added and peers delivering curricula—showed some improvement favoring peers. Compared with professional staff, peers were better able to reduce inpatient use and improve a range of recovery outcomes, although one study found a negative impact. Effectiveness of peers in existing clinical roles was mixed. CONCLUSIONS: Peer support services have demonstrated many notable outcomes. However, studies that better differentiate the contributions of the peer role and are conducted with greater specificity, consistency, and rigor would strengthen the evidence.

We compiled information from more than 1000 studies to help organisations and commissioners make decisions about investing in peer support. We found that peer support can take many forms, such as informal telephone calls, group get-togethers, online forums or structured training offered by paid peers in partnership with professionals.  The most promising types of peer support appear to be:  face-to-face groups run by trained peers which focus on emotional support, sharing experiences, practical activities and education one-to-one support offered face-to-face or by telephone online forums, particularly for improving knowledge and anxiety support offered regularly (such as weekly) for three to six months

world

Peer support specialists (PSS) are individuals in recovery from a substance use disorder who contribute to substance use treatment by offering support to clients based on shared experience. The Sub...

10.1080/07347324.2016.1182815

This literature review was put together in an effort to gather all of the information into one place as well as identify gaps in order to make recommendations for the future. In it, you will find an overview of current settings utilizing peer recovery support services, key findings, and recommendations for future study. This information deepens our understanding of the peer roles, job functions, and tasks in a wide range of settings. The research is promising—and there is much more to do to grow PRSS further.

Peer recovery support services are delivered by individuals in recovery from substance use disorders to peers with substance use disorders or co-occurring mental disorders. This review describes the service and assesses its evidence base.MethodsAuthors searched PubMed, PsycINFO, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, Sociological Abstracts, and Social Services Abstracts for outcome studies of peer recovery support services from 1995 through 2012. They found two randomized controlled trials, four quasi-experimental studies, four studies with pre-post service designs, and one review. Authors chose from three levels of evidence (high, moderate, and low) on the basis of benchmarks for the number of studies and quality of their methodology. They also described the evidence of service effectiveness.ResultsThe studies met the minimum criteria for moderate level of evidence. Studies demonstrated reduced relapse rates, increased treatment retention, improved relationships with treatment providers and social supports, and increased satisfaction with the overall treatment experience. Methodological concerns included inability to distinguish the effects of peer recovery support from other recovery support activities, small samples and heterogeneous populations, lack of consistent or definitive outcomes, and lack of any or appropriate comparison groups.ConclusionsPeer recovery support providers aim to help individuals achieve and maintain recovery, yet studies to date have not tested the key mechanisms of this intervention. To better demonstrate the effectiveness of peer recovery support, researchers should isolate its effects from other peer-based services. Additional research should solidify its place within the substance use treatment continuum for adults with substance use disorders.

In this narrative review, we outline the literature describing the history, training, certification, and role of peer recovery support specialists working  with people with substance use disorders at different stages of active use and  recovery. We explore the impact of peer recovery support specialists serving  people in various settings, including the community, hospitals and emergency  departments, jails and prisons, and treatment and recovery agencies; and  describes considerations for future expansion of peer recovery support services,  including supervision needs, compassion fatigue and burnout, and scope of  practice. Finally, we make recommendations to support the broad implementation of  peer recovery support services as a sustainable, cohesive, and replicable  component of harm reduction and addiction services. We also make recommendations  for research to continue to evaluate peer recovery support specialist  interventions across settings and outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: To identify peer workers’ perceptions and experiences of barriers to implementation of peer worker roles in mental health services. DESIGN: Review of qualitative and quantitative studies. DATA SOURCES: A comprehensive electronic database search was conducted between October 2014 and December 2015 in PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, and PsycARTICLES. Additional articles were identified through handsearch. REVIEW METHODS: All articles were assessed on quality. A thematic analysis informed by a multi-level approach was adopted to identify and discuss the main themes in the individual studies. Reporting was in line with the « Enhancing transparency in reporting the synthesis of qualitative research » statement. RESULTS: Eighteen articles met the inclusion criteria. All studies adopted qualitative research methods, of which three studies used additional quantitative methods. Peer workers’ perceptions and experiences cover a range of themes including the lack of credibility of peer worker roles, professionals’ negative attitudes, tensions with service users, struggles with identity construction, cultural impediments, poor organizational arrangements, and inadequate overarching social and mental health policies. CONCLUSIONS: This review can inform policy, practice and research from the unique perspective of peer workers. Mental health professionals and peer workers should enter into an alliance to address barriers in the integration of peer workers and to enhance quality of service delivery. Longitudinal research is needed to determine how to address barriers in the implementation of peer worker roles.

OBJECTIVES: Peer support involves people in recovery from psychiatric disability offering support to others in the same situation. It is based on the belief that people who have endured and overcome a psychiatric disability can offer useful support, encouragement, and hope to their peers. Although several quantitative reviews on the effectiveness of peer support have been conducted, qualitative studies were excluded. This study aimed to synthesize findings from these studies. METHOD:  A qualitative metasynthesis was conducted, involving examination, critical comparison, and synthesis of 27 published studies. The experiences of peer support workers, their nonpeer colleagues, and the recipients of peer support services were investigated. RESULTS: Peer support workers experiences included nonpeer staff discrimination and prejudice, low pay and hours, and difficulty managing the transition from “patient” to peer support worker. Positive experiences included collegial relationships with nonpeer staff, and other peers; and increased wellness secondary to working. Recipients of peer support services experienced increased social networks and wellness. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE:  The findings highlight training, supervision, pay, nonpeer staff/peer staff relationships, as important factors for statutory mental health peer support programs. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved)

10.1037/h0094744

BACKGROUND: The employment of Peer Support Workers, who themselves have experience of significant emotional distress, can promote recovery at an individual and organisational level. While research examining the benefits of peer support within mental health services continues to grow, an understanding of how, and through what processes, these benefits are reached remains under-developed. AIMS: To review the published research literature relating to the process of peer support and its underpinning mechanisms to better understand how and why it works. METHOD: A scoping review of published literature identified studies relating to peer support mechanisms, processes and relationships. Studies were summarised and findings analysed. RESULTS: Five mechanisms were found to underpin peer support relationships (lived experience, love labour, the liminal position of the peer worker, strengths-focussed social and practical support, and the helper role).CONCLUSIONS: The identified mechanisms can underpin both the success and difficulties associated with peer support relationships. Further research should review a broader range of literature and clarify how these mechanisms contribute to peer support in different contexts.