Voucher-Based Incentives in a Prevention Setting (VIPS)

July 30, 2013 updated by: Friends Research Institute, Inc.
This study evaluates a contingency management program that rewards homeless, non-treatment-seeking substance abusing men who have sex with men (MSM) for abstaining from drugs and for performing prosocial behaviors. If this program motivates these individuals to increase prosocial and healthy behaviors and decrease drug/alcohol use, established prevention programs may modify their approaches to include contingency management, and use it to address the staggering public health problems homeless substance-abusing MSMs face on a daily basis.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Detailed Description

Homelessness is a significant problem plaguing American cities and homeless substance abusers face increased risks. Homeless, substance abusing men who have sex with men (MSM) suffer 80% HIV seroprevalence, engage in the sex trades and resist treatment for substance abuse. For almost 30 years, the Van Ness Recovery House (VNRH) has been providing treatment services to homeless substance-abusing MSMs in Hollywood, CA. In 1994, VNRH began providing community-based HIV prevention services to non-treatment seeking homeless substance-abusing MSMs through the VNPD, its prevention division. Contingency management interventions providing positive incentives for behavior change may be particularly well suited for this disenfranchised, high-risk cohort. Specifically, voucher-based incentive therapies (VBRT) may be particularly effective since they have established potency for increasing prosocial behaviors that successfully compete with taking drugs and for reducing drug use. A randomized, controlled trial will assign 144 non-treatment seeking homeless substance-abusing MSMs at VNPD to either VBRT or control groups (72/group) for 24 weeks, with planned follow up at 7, 9 and 12 months from randomization. The VBRT group will earn vouchers in exchange for completing prosocial and healthy behaviors and/or submitting drug-negative urine and alcohol-negative breath samples. Vouchers will be redeemable for goods located in an onsite voucher store. The control group will receive feedback regarding behaviors performed and urinalysis and breath alcohol tests, but will not receive voucher points for these behaviors. We will assess the efficacy of the VBRT intervention for increasing prosocial and healthy behavior and reducing substance abuse among these non-treatment seeking homeless substance-abusing MSMs receiving services at VNPD. We will also assess the impact of VBRT on other measures of therapeutic change consistent with a harm reduction approach, including reduction of psychiatric symptoms, decreased injection drug use and high-risk sexual behavior, increased participation in prevention programming, improvement in different domains of overall functioning (medical/social/vocational), and increased readiness to change. Additionally, we will examine whether baseline participant characteristics predict VBRT outcomes. Applying VBRT to non-treatment seeking homeless substance-abusing MSMs as well as integrating VBRT into a well-established prevention program with a harm reduction philosophy are both highly innovative. Our reinforcement contingencies will also shape behavioral steps towards more complex behaviors, employing a basic operant tenet that has not received sufficient attention. Overall, our proposed research has the potential to have a significant impact on the public health of the Los Angeles homeless, gay and bisexual community. If VBRT is efficacious for motivating non-treatment seeking homeless substance-abusing MSMs in a community-based prevention program to increase prosocial and healthy behaviors and decrease drug/alcohol use, established prevention programs may modify their approaches to include contingency management, and use it to address the staggering public health problems HGMSAs face on a daily basis.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

131

Phase

  • Phase 2
  • Phase 3

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • California
      • Los Angeles, California, United States, 90028
        • Friends Community Center

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years to 65 years (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

Male

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Self-identified, non-treatment seeking, men who have sex with men (MSM) at least 18 years of age and eligible to participate in the VNPD Men's Program. To be eligible to participate in the VNPD Men's Program, a person must report that they have sex with men (or men and women) and actively use drugs or alcohol.
  • DSM-IV diagnosis of substance dependence as determined by structured clinical interview for DSM-IV (SCID) on at least one of the following substances: alcohol, marijuana, methamphetamine, cocaine, crack, MDMA (ecstasy), opiates, or dissociative anesthetics (PCP, ketamine). These substances were chosen because they are the ones commonly used by individuals contacted by the VNPD's street outreach workers.
  • Ability to understand and provide written informed consent. Also see section D6.1 for consent procedures used with vulnerable populations.
  • Able to provide sufficient locator information for follow-up and/or known to VNPD outreach workers.

Exclusion Criteria: Psychiatric health issues requiring a higher level of care.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Prevention
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
No Intervention: Control
Control condition receiving minimal incentives for service program attendance and participation.
Experimental: Contingency Management
Contingency management (Voucher-Based Reinforcement Therapy) intervention providing positive reinforcement for service program participation and attendance, enactment of prosocial/health behavior, and/or clean urine samples (i.e., no illicit drug use) and clean breathalyzer tests (i.e., BA < 0.05).

Participants were randomized into either the CM or control condition. Both conditions earned points for attendance and participation (max 364 points).

Participants in the CM condition also earned points for targeted health-promoting behaviors and for drug/alcohol abstinence. CM points for targeted health-promoting behaviors were not limited. Points for abstaining from substance use were awarded based on a Level 1 (recent abstinence for amphetamine, methamphetamine, PCP, and cocaine metabolites, as well as blood alcohol <0.05) urine sample.

Other Names:
  • VIPS

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Amount ($) Earned for Targeted Prosocial and Healthy Behaviors
Time Frame: 24 Weeks
Participants earned contingency management vouchers for targeted prosocial and healthy behaviors. 1 voucher = $1
24 Weeks
Proportion of Level 1 (i.e., Drug Negative Urines and Alcohol Negative Breath) Clean Urine Samples Provided at 12-month Follow-up, by Condition.
Time Frame: 24 Weeks
24 Weeks

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Self-reported Psychiatric Symptoms at 12-month Follow-up.
Time Frame: 12 months
As measured by the General Severity Index (GSI), a summary domain included on the Brief Symptom Inventory. The GSI combines information on both the number of symptoms described and the severity of those symptoms. Lower values on the GSI indicate less severe symptoms. Normative non-patient populations have been shown to have average GSI scores with a mean of 0.30 and a standard deviation of 0.31. Normative outpatient psychiatric patients have demonstrated GSI scores with a mean of 1.32 with a standard deviation of 0.72.
12 months
Self-reported Sexual Behaviors at 12-month Follow-up
Time Frame: 12 months
Count of recent (past 30 days) male sexual partners.
12 months

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Study Director: Jesse B Fletcher, Ph.D., Friends Research Institute, Inc.

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

April 1, 2005

Primary Completion (Actual)

February 1, 2008

Study Completion (Actual)

February 1, 2008

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

January 22, 2008

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

February 4, 2008

First Posted (Estimate)

February 5, 2008

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

August 1, 2013

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

July 30, 2013

Last Verified

July 1, 2013

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • NIDA 015990
  • R01DA015990 (U.S. NIH Grant/Contract)

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Substance-related Disorders

Clinical Trials on Voucher-Based Reinforcement Therapy

3
Subscribe