Search

This paper reflects the collective experiences of fourteen internationally based social group work educators who met weekly and virtually for seven months during the transition to online teaching necessitated by the coronavirus pandemic. The meetings functioned as a mutual aid support group sponsored by the International Association of Social Work with Groups (IASWG). The paper discusses the group's perceptions of the essential components of effective online group work education. It begins with a review of the history of online social work education. It then outlines the key components instrumental in the planning and developing of engaged online group work classes. Topics include pre-course preparation, norm setting, and building community in the online classroom. Considerations related to the video conferencing platforms, course formats, activities, managing online fatigue, screen sharing, handling chat features, cameras, and break out rooms are interspersed throughout. The paper concludes with a discussion of the use of mutual aid groups as online teaching tools and highlights the online group work teaching experiences of two members in New Zealand and Namibia. Despite initial hesitancy to teach group work virtually, the authors recognize that this can be done effectively but requires additional planning and, ideally, peer and institutional support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Mutual support groups are an important source of long-term help for people impacted by addictive behaviors. Routine outcome monitoring (ROM) and feedback are yet to be implemented in these settings. SMART Recovery mutual support groups focus on self-empowerment and use evidence-based techniques (eg, motivational and behavioral strategies). Trained facilitators lead all SMART Recovery groups, providing an opportunity to implement ROM.Objective: The aim of this stage 1 pilot study is to explore the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary outcomes of a novel, purpose-built mobile health ROM and feedback app (SMART Track) in mutual support groups coordinated by SMART Recovery Australia (SRAU) over 8 weeks.Methods: SMART Track was developed during phase 1 of this study using participatory design methods and an iterative development process. During phase 2, 72 SRAU group participants were recruited to a nonrandomized, prospective, single-arm trial of the SMART Track app. Four modes of data collection were used: ROM data directly entered by participants into the app; app data analytics captured by Amplitude Analytics (number of visits, number of unique users, visit duration, time of visit, and user retention); baseline, 2-, and 8-week follow-up assessments conducted through telephone; and qualitative telephone interviews with a convenience sample of study participants (20/72, 28%) and facilitators (n=8).Results: Of the 72 study participants, 68 (94%) created a SMART Track account, 64 (88%) used SMART Track at least once, and 42 (58%) used the app for more than 5 weeks. During week 1, 83% (60/72) of participants entered ROM data for one or more outcomes, decreasing to 31% (22/72) by the end of 8 weeks. The two main screens designed to provide personal feedback data (Urges screen and Overall Progress screen) were the most frequently visited sections of the app. Qualitative feedback from participants and facilitators supported the acceptability of SMART Track and the need for improved integration into the SRAU groups. Participants reported significant reductions between the baseline and 8- week scores on the Severity of Dependence Scale (mean difference 1.93, SD 3.02; 95% CI 1.12-2.73) and the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale-10 (mean difference 3.96, SD 8.31; 95% CI 1.75-6.17), but no change on the Substance Use Recovery Evaluator (mean difference 0.11, SD 7.97; 95% CI -2.02 to 2.24) was reported.Conclusions: Findings support the feasibility, acceptability, and utility of SMART Track. Given that sustained engagement with mobile health apps is notoriously difficult to achieve, our findings are promising. SMART Track offers a potential solution for ROM and personal feedback, particularly for people with substance use disorders who attend mutual support groups.Trial Registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12619000686101; https://anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=377336.International Registered Report Identifier (irrid): RR2-10.2196/15113. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Addictions contribute significantly to the overall disease burden for Indigenous peoples of colonised countries. Mutual support groups are one of the most common addiction recovery resources, however their effectiveness for Indigenous peoples is unclear.Methods: A PRISMA-informed search was performed to retrieve empirical studies on addiction recovery mutual support groups for Indigenous peoples of Australia, New Zealand, Canada, United States of America and Hawaii. Databases searched were: MEDLINE, CINAHL Plus, PsychINFO, PsychARTICLES, SocINDEX, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PubMed, Scopus and UlrichsWeb, Informit Collections, Australian Indigenous HealthInfonet and Lowitja Institute electronic databases. Exclusion criteria were: 1) not an Indigenous focus; 2) not an addiction focus (i.e. including alcohol, other drug, gambling); 3) not a mutual support group focus; 4) not an original study; 5) not a complete study; 6) not published in English language.Results: Four studies published between 2001 and 2006 met review criteria. All studies were conducted in the United States of America with Native American Indian peoples (n = 1600) and featured Alcoholics Anonymous only. Study designs were: a retrospective analysis of survey data, a cross-sectional survey report, a clinical case study and an ethnographic study. Methodological differences precluded meaningful translation of results.Conclusion: There is a lack of empirical knowledge on the acceptability and outcomes of addiction recovery mutual support groups for Indigenous peoples of Australia, New Zealand, Canada, United States of America and Hawaii. This review suggests recommendations for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]