1. Commissioning Mutual Aid Facilitation: Obstacles and Opportunities
Tony Mercer
Public Health England
29th April 2014

2. Mutual aid groups in West MidlandsAA NA CA
Smart
MAP
Birmingham 52 20 11 2
Coventry 14 6 1
Dudley 5 3
Herefordshire 15
Sandwell
Shropshire 25
Solihull 4
Staffordshire 21
Stoke
Telford & Wrekin
Walsall
Warwickshire 16
Wolverhampton
Worcestershire
West Mids Total
175

3. Mutual aid groups in East MidlandsAA NA CA
Smart
Derby 10 5
Derbyshire 15 3
Leicester 12
Leicestershire/Rutland 17 2
Lincolnshire 34
Nottingham 30 9
Nottinghamshire 31
East Mids Total
149 26 4

4. Opportunities
Public health perspective
PHE toolkit
Evidence base
Obstacles
Organisational change
Structural obstacles
Ideological obstacles

5. Organisational change
Duties and responsibilities
People
Money

6. Structural obstacles
Definitions – mutual aid, peer support and recovery community organisations
Inter-agency joint working
Key-working - how long and how often?

7. Ideological obstacles
Its “religious”

8. ACMD Recovery Standing Committee “What recovery outcomes does the evidence tell us we can expect?”
“There is emerging evidence from a meta-analysis that a close match between personal beliefs and the choice of mutual aid group actually attended improves outcomes and that non-12-step groups are probably as effective as 12- step groups.”
Atkins & Hawdon (2007) Religiosity and participation in mutual-aid support groups for addiction

9. ACMD Recovery Standing Committee “What recovery outcomes does the evidence tell us we can expect?”
Atkins & Hawdon (2007) Religiosity and participation in mutual-aid support groups for addiction
the effect of different recruitment strategies
interclass correlations per primary recovery groups found that they were not homogeneous
no direct measurement of the degree of the “religiosity” or “spirituality” of different groups was made despite their being substantial heterogeneity among groups

10. ACMD Recovery Standing Committee “What recovery outcomes does the evidence tell us we can expect?”
The association between 12-step mutual aid affiliation and good outcomes is strongest among people who are younger, white, less educated, unstably employed, less religious, and less interpersonally skilled Timko, DeBenedetti & Billow (2006) Intensive referral to 12-step self-help groups and 6-month substance use disorder outcomes

11. Kelly & White (2012) Broadening the base of addiction recovery mutual aid
In the most recent SMART participant survey (N=513)
60.7% of members reported believing in some kind of God or Higher Power
85.2% reported attending AA or other 12-step organizations in addition to SMART

12. Public health perspective
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
Social relationships: Overall findings from this meta-analysis
Social relationships: High vs. low social support contrasted
Social relationships: Complex measures of social integration
Smoking <15 cigarettes daily
Smoking cessation: Cease vs. continue in patients with CHD
Alcohol consumption: Abstinence vs. excessive drinking
Flu vaccine: Pneumococcal vaccination in adults
Cardiac rehabilitation (exercise) for patients with CHD
Physical activity (controlling for adiposty)
BMI: Lean vs. obese
Social relationships have as great an impact on health outcomes as smoking cessation, and more than physical activity and issues to address obesity (Holt-Lunstad et al 2010)
Drug treatment for hypertension in populations > 59 years
Air pollution: low vs. high
UNCLASSIFIED

13. Public health perspective
5 ways to well-being important to all.
May be especially lacking in drug users and needing attention during recovery, to support recovery.
Mutual aid can contribute to most of the 5 ways – even ‘be active’ if people walk or cycle to meetings!

14. Public health perspective
Psychotherapeutic
Social Networks
Bio Medical

15. Public health perspective
Asset Based Commissioning – look what's in the fridge before going to the supermarket

16. PHE toolkit
A briefing on the evidence-based drug and alcohol treatment guidance recommendations on mutual aid
Brings together existing findings and recommendations from:
•NICE Quality Standards and Clinical Guidelines
•RODT: Medications in Recovery
•ACMD: Recovery Standing Committee’s 2nd report on recovery outcomes

17. Mutual aid self-assessment tool
PHE toolkit
Mutual aid self-assessment tool
Availability
Promoting mutual aid
Leadership and workforce
Facilitation
Local strategic planning and monitoring

18. PHE toolkit
Facilitating access to mutual aid: three essential stages for helping clients access appropriate mutual aid support

19. PHE toolkit
Improving access to mutual aid: a brief guide for commissioners
Local vision
Self-assessment
Local action plan/steering group
Service specifications
NDTMS
Engaging with Mutual Aid Oct 2013

20. PHE toolkit Improving access to mutual aid: a brief guide
for alcohol and drug treatment service managers
Develop links with local groups/reps
Workforce knowledge and skills
Literature and promotion
FAMA/key-working/supervision
Care-planning documentation
Engaging with Mutual Aid Oct 2013

21. Evidence base If mutual aid works……….
it will improve performance (more successful completions/less representations)
there's an ethical case for doing it

22. QS23 Quality standard for drug use disorders (2012) Quality statement 7: Recovery and reintegration
People in drug treatment are offered support to access services that promote recovery and reintegration including housing, education, employment, personal finance, healthcare and mutual aid.

23. 6/7 studies included focussed on 12 step mutual aid groups
NICE Clinical Guidelines CG51 (2007) psychosocial interventions for drug misuse
23 studies identified
16 studies excluded
6/7 studies included focussed on 12 step mutual aid groups
2 x RCTs - McAuliffe (1990) and Timko et al.(2006)
1 x RCT sub-analysis - Weiss et al. (2005)
2 x cohort studies - Moos et al. (1999) and Ethridge et al. (1999)
1 x prospective longitudinal study - Fiorentine & Hillhouse (2000)
1 x case series - Toumbourou et al. (2002)

24. NICE Clinical Guidelines CG51 (2007) psychosocial interventions for drug misuse
Clinical summary
There is limited but consistent evidence from these studies that 12-step attendance is associated with abstinence from illicit drugs and alcohol, and fewer drug and alcohol problems.
Furthermore, involvement in such programmes can be improved by interventions from healthcare professionals to encourage regular attendance and active participation in such groups.

25. Clinical practice recommendations
NICE Clinical Guidelines CG51 (2007) psychosocial interventions for drug misuse
Clinical practice recommendations
Staff should routinely provide people who misuse drugs with information about self-help groups. These groups should normally be based on 12-step principles; for example, Narcotics Anonymous and Cocaine Anonymous.
If a person who misuses drugs has expressed an interest in attending a 12-step self-help group, staff should consider facilitating the person’s initial contact with the group, for example by making the appointment, arranging transport, accompanying him or her to the first session and dealing with any concerns.

26. NICE Clinical Guidelines CG115 (2011) Diagnosing, assessing and managing harmful drinking and alcohol dependence
For all people seeking help for alcohol misuse:
•give information on the value and availability of community support networks and self-help groups (eg, AA or SMART Recovery)
•help them to participate in community support networks and self-help groups by encouraging them to go to meetings and arranging support so that they can attend

27. NICE Clinical Guidelines CG115 (2011) Diagnosing, assessing and managing harmful drinking and alcohol dependence
TSF v CBT - Easton (2007)
TSF v MET and CBT - MATCH (1997)
TSF v coping skills - Walitzer (2009)
TSF v couples therapy and psycho-educational intervention - Falsstewart (2005), Falsstewart (2006)
Standard TSF v intensive TSF – Timko (2007)
Directive TSF v motivational TSF and coping skills – Walitzer (2009)

28. NICE Clinical Guidelines CG115 (2011) Diagnosing, assessing and managing harmful drinking and alcohol dependence
TSF was significantly better than other active interventions in reducing the amount of alcohol consumed when assessed at 6- month follow-up
Those receiving TSF were more likely to be retained at 9-month follow-up
Intensive TSF was significantly more effective than standard TSF in maintaining abstinence at 12-month follow-up
Directive TSF was more effective at maintaining abstinence than motivational TSF up to 12-month follow-up

29. ACMD Recovery Standing Committee “What recovery outcomes does the evidence tell us we can expect?”
9. The roles of recovery community organisations and mutual aid, including Alcoholics Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous and SMART Recovery, are to be welcomed and supported as evidence indicates they play a valuable role in recovery.

30. ACMD Recovery Standing Committee “What recovery outcomes does the evidence tell us we can expect?”
A range of recovery outcomes and sustained recovery are more likely to be achieved if people engage in mutual aid (AA) Fiorentine (1999), Kelly, Hoeppner, Stout & Pagano (2012)
 Mutual aid (AA) participants who become actively involved in helping others, for example as a sponsor, are more likely to do well Fiorentine, (1999), Pagano, Friend, Tonigan, & Stout, (2004)
 Having a sponsor early (AA) was beneficial and predicted increased abstinence from alcohol, cannabis and cocaine Tonigan & Rice (2010)

31. ACMD Recovery Standing Committee “What recovery outcomes does the evidence tell us we can expect?”
Being a sponsor (NA/AA) over a one-year period, was strongly associated with substantial improvements in sustained abstinence rates for injecting drug users Crape, Latkin, Laris & Knowlton (2002)
“There is emerging evidence on other forms of mutual aid, for example, SMART Recovery”

32. Opportunities
Public health perspective
PHE toolkit
Evidence base
Obstacles
Organisational change
Structural obstacles
Ideological obstacles