Preliminary Results from Our Study
The Stay in Touch Study is Producing Results
Today’s post will be of interest to those who want an update on a study we conducted last year. If you are looking for more general Recovery/Psychology/Christianity stuff a subsequent post might be more to your liking.
You may remember the story of Nancy and Jennifer that I told over a year ago. Nancy and Jennifer came to our church and were immediately invited to attend our Bible studies on the topic of addiction—a program we call Resilient Recovery.
I remarked at the time that attrition rates for addiction programs are so poor that these ladies had a 6 in 100 chance of being with us for a full year.
It was precisely because of high attrition rates that we spent the last year following a group of our attendees. The goal was to stay in touch for a year—regardless of where their journeys led them. We called this study “The Stay in Touch Program.” The study involved using frequent text messages and reaching out to emergency contacts to help us stay in contact with people for a year.
We hoped to learn about the factors associated with people staying in recovery, leaving recovery, and/or relapsing.
Many of the people in our study were formerly homeless, and 74% were Native American, making this the only study we know of that has investigated this difficult-to-follow population.
We have just completed the first level of analysis of the study, and I am pleased to share with you some of the initial insights.
General insights
Spiritual Well-being helps people stay in recovery. The baseline scores of stayers were slightly higher than those of individuals we lost contact with. Additionally, those who remained in recovery showed improvement in their scores on a measure of spiritual well-being, while the scores of those who dropped out decreased over the course of the study.
The top four factors that motivated people to stay in touch with Resilient were “Appreciation for the program,” “Ongoing healing,” “Relationship with God,” and “Joy of attendance.” These factors were uncovered through interviews with participants, which were analyzed using qualitative statistical software. These factors confirmed my anecdotal experiences with the program and my review of themes that emerged from thank-you cards written by participants for donors. I like it when insights are confirmed from multiple sources.
The top three barriers to the program were “Transportation challenges,” “The meetings are too short,” and “People come in late.” These factors suggest some very concrete ways we can make the meetings more accessible and meaningful. Interestingly, we have recently made the meetings longer and implemented some changes that have reduced the number of people arriving late. So, that’s cool. We are slightly ahead of the curve in addressing these barriers, although transportation remains an issue.
People really liked the text messages we sent them. They reported that the messages provided an opportunity for self-reflection, served as a helpful reminder to stay on top of their recovery, and made them feel supported and cared for.
One participant summed it up nicely:
When I got the text message, I think hat was nice. It let me know that you guys care for me and that you guys want to know that I am doing good. A check-up made me feel good.
However, we did get some ideas about improving this process if we decide to implement it in the future. The current texts were generic and did not offer any feedback or encouragement. We asked a couple of standard questions and did not offer any commentary on their responses. It was a scientific study, after all—and scientists are not known for their warmth or personal touch. If we decide to move forward with this technique, we will personalize the messages, providing individualized recovery tips and praising their progress. I think this could be an excellent opportunity for volunteers or more senior attendees to offer support and encouragement.
Sobriety Motivators
We asked those who stayed in recovery to tell us what helped them. Below is what they told us.
People named “Church attendance” as the number one thing that helped them stay in recovery. This is a fascinating finding and it backs up a stat I recently found that said regular church attendance decreases by 68% the risk for a “Death of Despair,” i.e., suicide, overdose, or health issue caused by substance use. My guess is that the church serves to promote sobriety and a life of purpose in multiple ways. I would love to explore what aspects of the church people in recovery find so helpful. This is not something we can answer with the current study, but it is definitely a line of future inquiry.
Support from peers and participation in sober activities were the next most important motivators for sobriety.
Sobriety Barriers
People also shared with us what prevented them from staying sober or caused a relapse. The following is what they told us.
Exposure to substances was by far the most perilous factor affecting sobriety. In other words, if you are around substances or they are around you—look out, relapse could be imminent. This backs up my long-held belief that the number one job for a treatment facility is to keep people away from substances. Backpack searches, locked doors, and immediate dismissals of rule breakers are crucial to maintaining a clean and sober environment for residents. The comments from the people in the study suggest that they WANT a sober living environment and know they cannot handle freedom well.
Exposure to substances was related to low engagement. Those who had high engagement mentioned being exposed to substances the least. For those classified as having moderate engagement, exposure to substances was their most frequent comment. The same was true for those classified as having low engagement; however, they reported exposure to substances even more frequently than the moderate group. Below is a conceptual mockup of what the data might look like. It’s not real data.
These are correlational relationships. So the meaning is not clear. My statistics professors taught me that when a correlation like this appears in the data, there are 4 possibilities:
Higher engagement lowers exposure to substances.
Exposure to substances lowers engagement.
A third factor could be influencing both. For example, stricter group homes might keep people from being exposed to substances, and might make people more engaged in Resilient. Or personal motivation might make a person have high engagement AND cause them to avoid exposure to substances.
Finally, it may simply be a quirk of the data, something researchers call a “spurious” correlation. They happen more often than you might think.
Although we don’t know what the correlation means at this time, it is an interesting finding that definitely warrants some more investigation.
Recomendations
People also provided us with suggestions on how to improve the program and recommendations for maintaining sobriety. Below is what they said.
More. Just More. People wanted more, more, more. More facilitators, more meetings per week, longer meetings, and more social events with other attendees.
People also wanted something akin to a sponsor. This confirmed the importance of an idea we have had for some time: providing sober mentors. Our church body has a great mentor training program that would meet the needs of our program. We successfully piloted this with one mentor and mentee, and the experience went well. Alas, the harvest is plentiful, but the workers are few. One of my goals is to recruit some more mentors. I believe it will significantly enhance the program.
Coda
You might wonder what ever happened to Nancy and Jennifer [not their real names]. Jennifer moved back home to her Reservation, and we don’t know much about how she is doing. Nancy stayed in touch in a big way. She completed her treatment, lives on her own, and got a job with a local sober living home. She now drives her clients to our Resilient meetings and is a Resilient Facilitator herself.
She’s been baptized and has taken our church’s membership classes. When her boyfriend died, our church/Resilient community stayed with her, brought her meals, and our pastor officiated the boyfriend’s funeral back home on his Rez.
I hope the insights from this study will help us better serve the recovery community and see many more Nancies in our future.
The year-long study you just read about was only possible because of reader support like yours. Following participants through their recovery journey, conducting in-depth interviews, and analyzing what truly helps people persevere—this research takes time, resources, and dedicated staff.
We're facing a budget shortfall this year that threatens our ability to launch similar studies. Your mid-year donation, whether $25, $250, or $500, will directly fund the improvements we make to our program based on the results of the study.
Recovery stories matter. Recovery research saves lives. Help us keep both going.
We appreciate any contribution you can make.