Reduction of Drug Use and HIV Risk Among Out-of-Treatment Methamphetamine Users

January 18, 2017 updated by: University of Colorado, Denver

There is a need to identify and test effective strategies to reduce meth use and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) risk behaviors in heterosexuals. This project will compare the efficacy of a manually-driven HIV testing and counseling (HIV T/C) intervention, with HIV T/C plus a manualized Contingency Management (CM), with HIV T/C plus CM plus a manualized Strengths-Based Case Management (CM/SBCM) model. As HIV T/C is the standard of care, the investigators are testing to determine if the investigators can enhance this standard. The specific aims and hypotheses of this protocol are:

  1. To compare the relative efficacy of HIV T/C vs. CM vs. CM/SBCM on reducing drug use, specifically meth use. Hypothesis 1: CM/SBCM will reduce drug use more than those in CM (which will have more reduction than HIV T/C), potentially mediated through increased service utilization.
  2. To compare the relative efficacy of HIV T/C vs. CM vs. CM/SBCM on reducing HIV and STI risk behaviors, specifically sex risk behaviors but also needle risk for injection drug users (IDUs). Hypothesis 2: CM/SBCM will have greater decreases in HIV risk behaviors than those in CM (which will have greater decreases than HIV T/C), potentially mediated through reduced drug use.
  3. To compare the relative efficacy of HIV T/C vs. CM vs. CM/SBCM on improving mental health status. Hypothesis 3: CM/SBCM will have greater improvements in mental health status than those in CM (which will have greater improvements than HIV T/C), potentially mediated through increased service utilization and reduction of drug use, and potentially moderated by baseline meth use.

Study Overview

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

502

Phase

  • Not Applicable

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

    • Colorado
      • Denver, Colorado, United States, 80218
        • Project Safe

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 and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • 18 years of age or older
  • Be competent (not too intoxicated or mentally disabled) to give informed consent at the time of the interview
  • Meth use (verified through urine drug screening and a self-report of meth use of at least 4 times per month for the last 3 months)
  • Self-reported sex with someone of the opposite sex in last 30 days
  • Ability to provide a reliable address and phone number for contact
  • Not in drug treatment in the past 30 days
  • Willingness to be tested for HIV at baseline and follow-up
  • Not transient and no know reason why he/she will not be available for follow-up interviews
  • Not currently mandated by the criminal justice system to receive treatment based on self-report.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Participation in drug treatment in the past 30 days
  • Currently participating in another Project Safe study
  • Pregnant or attempting to become pregnant
  • Intoxicated or impaired mentally to the point that they cannot voluntarily consent to participate tin the project and/or respond to the interview

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: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Crossover Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: HIV Testing and Counseling
A manualized individual-level model consisting of two education and counseling sessions that structurally bracket confidential HIV antibody screening.
Active Comparator: Contingency Management (CM)
Contingency management is based on Skinner's principles of operant conditioning in behavioral psychology, dating back to the 1930s (Skinner 1938). The basis of this model is that behavior is learned and reinforced by environmental contingencies that reward or punish.
A manualized individual-level model consisting of two education and counseling sessions that structurally bracket confidential HIV antibody screening.
In voucher-based CM programs, drug users who submit urine samples that are negative for specified drugs are reinforced with vouchers. Based on operant conditioning, CM rewards those who comply with the targeted behavior and does not reward when compliance is not achieved. In this study a mid-value reinforcement CM schedule will be used in order to balance community cost concerns with the need to show comparative efficacy in reducing meth use and concomitant sex risk behaviors in a largely unstudied risk group. Participants in the CM arm will be asked to come to the study site three times a week to leave a urine sample, get the result, and will then be offered a voucher if their urine is clean and given brief verbal feedback.
Experimental: CM with Strengths-based case management
Strengths-based case management (SBCM) is a specific type of case management that is based on the following principles: 1) clients are most successful when they identify and use their strengths, abilities, and assets; 2) goal-setting is guided by the clients' perceptions of their own needs; 3) the client-case manager relationship is promoted as essential; 4) a creative approach to the use of the community will lead to the discovery of needed resources; and 5) case management is conducted in the community.
A manualized individual-level model consisting of two education and counseling sessions that structurally bracket confidential HIV antibody screening.
In voucher-based CM programs, drug users who submit urine samples that are negative for specified drugs are reinforced with vouchers. Based on operant conditioning, CM rewards those who comply with the targeted behavior and does not reward when compliance is not achieved. In this study a mid-value reinforcement CM schedule will be used in order to balance community cost concerns with the need to show comparative efficacy in reducing meth use and concomitant sex risk behaviors in a largely unstudied risk group. Participants in the CM arm will be asked to come to the study site three times a week to leave a urine sample, get the result, and will then be offered a voucher if their urine is clean and given brief verbal feedback.
Strengths-based case management (SBCM) is a specific type of case management that is based on the following principles: 1) clients are most successful when they identify and use their strengths, abilities, and assets; 2) goal-setting is guided by the clients' perceptions of their own needs; 3) the client-case manager relationship is promoted as essential; 4) a creative approach to the use of the community will lead to the discovery of needed resources; and 5) case management is conducted in the community. It differs from more traditional case management models that emphasize resource brokerage and client advocacy in its recognition that only the individual can change his/her behavior.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Time Frame
Reduction of drug use, specifically methamphetamine
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up interview
12-month follow-up interview
Reduction of HIV and STI risk behaviors, specifically sex risk behaviors but also needle risk for injection drug users
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up interview
12-month follow-up interview
Improved mental health status
Time Frame: 12-month follow-up interview
12-month follow-up interview

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Karen F Corsi, ScD, MPH, University of Colorado, Denver

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

August 1, 2010

Primary Completion (Actual)

June 13, 2015

Study Completion (Actual)

May 25, 2016

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

July 9, 2010

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

July 12, 2010

First Posted (Estimate)

July 13, 2010

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

January 20, 2017

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 18, 2017

Last Verified

January 1, 2017

More Information

Terms related to this study

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

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 HIV Infections

Clinical Trials on HIV Testing and Counseling

Subscribe