Page 81 - GHES-3-1

Global Health Economics and
Sustainability
Model designs for recovery from addiction

Table 1. Summary of Models of Recovery (Molina Fernández et al., 2022)
Model Country/ies Framework Tools Programs NGO
Biopsychosocial Spain (international) Medical, psychological, Motivation, behavioral Outpatient and Proyecto Hombre,
and social (environmental) change, emotional residential facilities CEIS
models modulation, social capital
PCP The United States and Sociological model skills, Motivational interviews, Focused on social Dianova, Institute
Canada (international) Empowerment, “housing design of case, action plan, reintegration Pulla
first” social capital
CHIME Belgium, the United Skills, empowerment, and Social support, services Community EURAD, Popov
Kingdom, and Sweden environmental models network, motivation, social intervention
capital
HERMESS Belgium, Croatia, Spain, Skills model and Motivation, behavioral Therapeutic San Patrignano,
Italy, and Sweden empowerment change, training in skills, communities, BASTA, Stijena
pre-professional training social reintegration
enterprises,
entrepreneurship
Abbreviation: PCP: Person centred planning.

ARC through the Living in Recovery questionnaire (Best
et al., 2020) can increase the relevance and effectiveness
of recovery-based programs, both as healthcare and social
responses to addictive behavior issues (EMCDDA, 2017).
Identifying the strengths and challenges faced by such
interventions may help identify the individuals and groups
most likely to have successful recovery programs (Best
et al., 2020).
For successful development and implementation of
recovery programs, the various risk groups that currently
exist should be extensively researched (EMCDDA, 2017;
Molina-Fernández, 2023). Furthermore, there is an urgent
need to design effective adaptations of interventions that
are tailored to the specific needs and problems of different
profiles of people with addiction issues, such as women,
young cannabis users, or functional cocaine users. The more
concrete and precise we are when designing interventions,
the more effective they will be, leading to a better prognosis
(Molina-Fernández, 2023). This approach is particularly
Figure 2. HERMESS model visual chart (Bazanti et al., 2017)
important for women undergoing treatment. There is
substantial scientific evidence showing that women have
a purely medical or pathological issue. Social interventions, special needs and vulnerabilities that must be addressed
especially social support and networks, are crucial in when receiving treatment; however, these factors are rarely
addressing addictive behavior (Best et al., 2020). Moreover, considered (Molina Fernández et al., 2022), suggesting a
drug addiction treatment resources should include need for women-specific programs and initiatives tailored
multidisciplinary teams; this offers substantial advantages to each woman’s unique circumstances (Molina-Fernández
in providing comprehensive recovery services. It is also et al., 2022).
essential to ensure that professionals receive complementary
It is important to move beyond the binary debate
training on transversal aspects to facilitate better detection between “harm reduction” and “recovery” and recognize
of problems and enable effective and equitable program
design and interventions (Milkman & Wanberg, 2012). that both types of intervention are necessary, leading
to an integrated, comprehensive intervention system
Using proven best practice models such as the (Molina-Fernández, 2023). Future studies must also
HERMESS recovery model (Barzanti et al., 2017) or consider cultural aspects and factors related to substance

Volume 3 Issue 1 (2025) 73 https://doi.org/10.36922/ghes.3243