1Nantes Université, CHU Nantes, UIC Psychiatrie et Santé Mentale, F-44000 Nantes, France.
2Nantes Université, Univ Tours, CHU Nantes, INSERM, MethodS in Patient-Centered Outcomes and HEalth ResEarch, SPHERE, F-44000 Nantes, France.
J Behav Addict. 2024 Mar 29;13(2):354-412. doi: 10.1556/2006.2024.00008. Print 2024 Jun 26.
While the concept of recovery is receiving increasing attention in the context of gambling disorder (GD), no consensus has yet been reached regarding its definition. This scoping review aims to map the literature on GD recovery, identify gaps, and provide insights for a more holistic and patient-centred perspective.
A systematic search of three databases was conducted (PubMed, PsycINFO, and ScienceDirect). Based on the method by which the results of these studies were produced, the studies included were sorted into four categories (quantitative, instrument validation, qualitative, and mixed studies) and subsequently examined using conceptual analysis.
One hundred thirteen articles were included in this research after the screening process. In the quantitative and instrument validation studies, recovery was defined or operationalized in terms of abstinence, the absence of a GD diagnosis, or mild GD severity, or by reference to treatment outcomes or controlled gambling. A meta-synthesis of the results of the qualitative studies revealed four core features of recovery (insight, empowerment and commitment, wellbeing enhancement, and reconsideration of the issue of relapse).
Discrepancies in definitions, outcomes, and variables used were evident across studies. Additionally, the quantitative and standardized approaches employed in most studies exhibited severe limitations with regard to defining recovery from the subjective and multidimensional perspectives of people recovering from GD.
This lack of definitional clarity emphasizes the necessity for further qualitative research. This research should encompass multiple stakeholder perspectives to develop a working definition promoting recovery from a holistic, patient-centred, and tailored approach.
虽然恢复的概念在赌博障碍(GD)的背景下受到越来越多的关注,但对于其定义尚未达成共识。本范围综述旨在绘制 GD 恢复的文献图谱,确定差距,并为更全面和以患者为中心的视角提供见解。
对三个数据库(PubMed、PsycINFO 和 ScienceDirect)进行了系统搜索。根据这些研究结果产生的方法,将研究分为四类(定量、仪器验证、定性和混合研究),然后使用概念分析进行检查。
经过筛选过程,本研究共纳入 113 篇文章。在定量和仪器验证研究中,恢复是通过禁欲、没有 GD 诊断、或轻度 GD 严重程度、或通过参考治疗结果或控制赌博来定义或操作化的。定性研究结果的元综合揭示了恢复的四个核心特征(洞察力、赋权和承诺、幸福感增强、以及重新考虑复发问题)。
研究之间在定义、结果和使用的变量方面存在差异。此外,大多数研究采用的定量和标准化方法在从主观和多维角度定义从 GD 中恢复方面存在严重局限性。
这种缺乏明确的定义强调了进一步进行定性研究的必要性。这项研究应包括多个利益相关者的观点,以制定一个从整体、以患者为中心和量身定制的方法促进恢复的工作定义。