The Effect of Leisure Intervention on Occupational Performance and Occupational Balance in Individuals with Substance Use Disorder: A Pilot Study.
Majid Farhadian, Malahat Akbarfahimi, Peyman Hassani Abharian and 2 others
PMID 38384794WHAT IT FOUND
In nine men with substance use disorder, group leisure education, planning, and chosen activities were feasible and the authors report favourable changes in occupational performance, balance, leisure participation, quality of life, and craving.
No control group, so this cannot show the programme caused these changes.
Key findings
01Nine participants completed the intervention and all phases of assessment, and no unanticipated adverse events were reported.
02The analysis found significant differences across preintervention, postintervention, and follow-up for all outcome variables (p < 0.001).
03Post hoc tests showed significant differences with large effect sizes (r = 0.59 to 0.60) between preintervention and postintervention/follow-up, which the authors describe as evidence of effectiveness, and no significant differences between postintervention and follow-up (p > 0.016).
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
This was a pilot study designed to provide preliminary data, not a controlled trial of efficacy. The analysed sample was small: nine participants, from a target sample of 12, with three exclusions for absence or incomplete postintervention evaluation. Participants were recruited through a convenience sample from treatment and support settings, and the paper states the sample was solely men. The design had no control group, so causal relationships and the specific contribution of the leisure intervention cannot be established. The paper states that leisure was not the primary outcome measure, and it reports several outcomes rather than a single clearly identified primary endpoint. Multiple outcome measures were analysed with an adjusted p value threshold of 0.016. The authors report that effect sizes decreased from postintervention to follow-up, and they note practical problems during sessions, including overcrowding, equipment malfunctions, and time constraints.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that the leisure programme caused these changes. The study had no control group, included only nine participants, and combined education, planning, and practical leisure activities, so the contribution of any single component cannot be separated.