- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT06094933
Mobile Anger Reduction Intervention (MARI)
A Randomized Controlled Trial of the Mobile Anger Reduction Intervention for Veterans
Study Overview
Status
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
Difficulty controlling anger is the most commonly reported reintegration concern among combat Veterans, especially those with a diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). In Veterans, problematic anger is associated with numerous negative psychosocial outcomes, including poor functional outcomes (both social and occupational), family discord, aggression, road rage, and suicide risk. Anger can also impede successful outcomes from PTSD treatment. Given the high prevalence of anger problems among Veterans with PTSD and the associated functional impairments, there is a clear need to develop innovative and effective anger interventions to improve functional outcomes. Use of mobile health (mHealth) technology could provide a low-cost method to increase the reach of anger management treatments to this high-need group of Veterans.
One of the mechanisms associated with problematic anger and aggression is hostile interpretation bias, i.e., a tendency to interpret ambiguous interpersonal situations as hostile. By reducing hostile interpretation bias, the investigators can reduce problematic anger and aggression and improve functional outcomes. A mobile application that uses evidence-based interpretation bias modification techniques to reduce hostile interpretation bias and anger outcomes has been developed and piloted. The goal of this project is to evaluate the efficacy of this mobile application among Veterans with PTSD.
A randomized controlled trial (RCT) will be conducted, in which 150 Veterans with PTSD and problematic anger will be randomized to either the Mobile Anger Reduction Intervention (MARI) or a health education condition (HED). The central hypothesis is that participants in the MARI condition will experience greater anger reductions and functional improvements relative to the HED condition.
The proposed research project will address the following Specific Aims: Aim 1: To evaluate the efficacy of MARI on anger outcomes (e.g., hostile interpretation bias, problematic anger) measured at post-treatment, 3-months, and 6-months post treatment; Aim 2: To evaluate the efficacy of MARI on functional improvements (i.e., psychosocial functioning, quality of life) and self-harm measured at post-treatment, 3-months, and 6-months post treatment; and Exploratory Aim: To explore whether changes in hostile interpretation bias (proposed treatment mechanism) mediate functional improvements.
Study Type
Enrollment (Estimated)
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Contact
- Name: Kirsten H Dillon, PhD
- Phone Number: (919) 286-0411
- Email: Kirsten.Dillon@va.gov
Study Contact Backup
- Name: Angela C Kirby, MS
- Phone Number: 7456 (919) 286-0411
- Email: angela.kirby@va.gov
Study Locations
-
-
North Carolina
-
Durham, North Carolina, United States, 27705-3875
- Recruiting
- Durham VA Medical Center, Durham, NC
-
Contact:
- Kirsten H Dillon, PhD
- Phone Number: (919) 286-0411
- Email: Kirsten.Dillon@va.gov
-
Principal Investigator:
- Kirsten H Dillon, PhD
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
- Child
- Adult
- Older Adult
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Veterans diagnosed with PTSD, established via chart review and a score of greater than or equal to 33 on the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5)
- Reporting a score of greater than or equal to 12 on the 5-item Dimensions of Anger Reactions Scale
- Have not had any changes to type or dose of psychiatric medications for 3 months, with no plans to make adjustments in the next 6 months
- Able to read at least 6th grade level material
Exclusion Criteria:
- Currently in a period of active psychosis or mania
- Exhibit current prominent suicidal or homicidal ideation requiring immediate intervention
- Have used the MARI application before as part of another research study
- Receiving (or plan to receive) other anger management psychotherapy or trauma-focused therapy for PTSD (i.e., prolonged exposure, cognitive processing therapy during the course of the study
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Treatment
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: Double
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / Arm |
Intervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: Mobile Anger Reduction Intervention (MARI)
Participants in this arm will download the MARI application (app) on their own smart phone device and will use the app for a period of 4 weeks.
|
This is a mobile intervention that uses interpretation bias modification (IBM) techniques to reduce the hostile interpretation bias.
Participants will download the MARI app and be instructed to complete at least 5 treatment sessions each week for a period of 4 weeks.
Each session takes approximately 10 minutes.
The app also includes a Nightly Diary to track symptoms, a calendar to program session reminders, and a My Progress feature to track use and performance.
|
|
Active Comparator: Health Education Condition (HED)
Participants in this arm will download the HED application (app) on their own smart phone device and will use the app for a period of 4 weeks.
|
This is a mobile application that delivers videos with psychoeducation about healthy habits and selfcare for general wellness.
Participants will download the HED app and be instructed to use it at least 5 times a week for a period of 4 weeks.
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
number of participants below the clinical cut off for problematic anger
Time Frame: Post-treatment (approx. one month after baseline assessment)
|
Measured with the Dimensions of Anger Reactions-5 scale; scores range from 5-25, with higher scores indicating higher levels of problematic anger; the clinical cut off is 12.
The investigators will count the number of participants in each group who have a score lower than 12.
|
Post-treatment (approx. one month after baseline assessment)
|
|
number of participants below the clinical cut off for problematic anger
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
|
Measured with the Dimensions of Anger Reactions-5 scale; scores range from 5-25, with higher scores indicating higher levels of problematic anger; the clinical cut off is 12.
The investigators will count the number of participants in each group who have a score lower than 12.
|
6-month follow-up
|
|
number of participants below the clinical cut off for problematic anger
Time Frame: 3-month follow-up
|
Measured with the Dimensions of Anger Reactions-5 scale; scores range from 5-25, with higher scores indicating higher levels of problematic anger; the clinical cut off is 12.
The investigators will count the number of participants in each group who have a score lower than 12.
|
3-month follow-up
|
|
number of participants with decreased hostile interpretation bias scores
Time Frame: from baseline to post-treatment assessments (approx. one month after baseline assessment)
|
Measured with the Word Sentence Association Paradigm-Hostility, hostility subscale.
Scores range from 1-6, with higher scores indicating higher levels hostile interpretation bias.
The investigators will count the number of participants in each group who have a reduction in scores within the time frame.
|
from baseline to post-treatment assessments (approx. one month after baseline assessment)
|
|
number of participants with decreased hostile interpretation bias scores
Time Frame: from baseline to 3-month follow-up
|
Measured with the Word Sentence Association Paradigm-Hostility, hostility subscale.
Scores range from 1-6, with higher scores indicating higher levels hostile interpretation bias.
The investigators will count the number of participants in each group who have a reduction in scores within the time frame.
|
from baseline to 3-month follow-up
|
|
number of participants with decreased hostile interpretation bias scores
Time Frame: from baseline to 6-month follow-up
|
Measured with the Word Sentence Association Paradigm-Hostility, hostility subscale.
Scores range from 1-6, with higher scores indicating higher levels hostile interpretation bias.
The investigators will count the number of participants in each group who have a reduction in scores within the time frame.
|
from baseline to 6-month follow-up
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
number of participants with decreased psychosocial impairment scores
Time Frame: from baseline to post-treatment assessments (approx. one month after baseline assessment)
|
Measured with the Brief Inventory of Psychosocial Functioning.
Scores range from 0-6, with higher scores indicating higher levels of psychosocial impairment.
The investigators will count the number of participants in each group who have a reduction of scores within the time frame.
|
from baseline to post-treatment assessments (approx. one month after baseline assessment)
|
|
number of participants with decreased psychosocial impairment scores
Time Frame: from baseline to 3-month follow-up
|
Measured with the Brief Inventory of Psychosocial Functioning.
Scores range from 0-6, with higher scores indicating higher levels of psychosocial impairment.
The investigators will count the number of participants in each group who have a reduction of scores within the time frame.
|
from baseline to 3-month follow-up
|
|
number of participants with decreased psychosocial impairment scores
Time Frame: from baseline to 6-month follow-up
|
Measured with the Brief Inventory of Psychosocial Functioning.
Scores range from 0-6, with higher scores indicating higher levels of psychosocial impairment.
The investigators will count the number of participants in each group who have a reduction of scores within the time frame.
|
from baseline to 6-month follow-up
|
|
number of participants with improved quality of life
Time Frame: from baseline to post-treatment assessments (approx. one month after baseline assessment)
|
Measured with the Quality of Life Inventory.
Scores range from -6-6, with higher scores indicating higher levels of satisfaction with life.
The investigators will count the number of participants in each group who have an increase in their score within the time frame.
|
from baseline to post-treatment assessments (approx. one month after baseline assessment)
|
|
number of participants with improved quality of life
Time Frame: from baseline to 3-month follow-up
|
Measured with the Quality of Life Inventory.
Scores range from -6-6, with higher scores indicating higher levels of satisfaction with life.
The investigators will count the number of participants in each group who have an increase in their score within the time frame.
|
from baseline to 3-month follow-up
|
|
number of participants with improved quality of life
Time Frame: from baseline to 6-month follow-up
|
Measured with the Quality of Life Inventory.
Scores range from -6-6, with higher scores indicating higher levels of satisfaction with life.
The investigators will count the number of participants in each group who have an increase in their score within the time frame.
|
from baseline to 6-month follow-up
|
|
number of participants with reduced suicidal ideation
Time Frame: from baseline to post-treatment assessments (approx. one month after baseline assessment)
|
Measured with the Columbia- Suicide Severity Rating Scale, suicidal ideation intensity rating.
Scores range from 0-25, with higher scores indicating higher intensity of suicidal ideation.
The investigators will count the number of participants in each group who have a decrease in their score within the time frame.
|
from baseline to post-treatment assessments (approx. one month after baseline assessment)
|
|
number of participants with reduced suicidal ideation
Time Frame: from baseline to 3-month follow-up
|
Measured with the Columbia- Suicide Severity Rating Scale, suicidal ideation intensity rating.
Scores range from 0-25, with higher scores indicating higher intensity of suicidal ideation.
The investigators will count the number of participants in each group who have a decrease in their score within the time frame.
|
from baseline to 3-month follow-up
|
|
number of participants with reduced suicidal ideation
Time Frame: from baseline to 6-month follow-up
|
Measured with the Columbia- Suicide Severity Rating Scale, suicidal ideation intensity rating.
Scores range from 0-25, with higher scores indicating higher intensity of suicidal ideation.
The investigators will count the number of participants in each group who have a decrease in their score within the time frame.
|
from baseline to 6-month follow-up
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Kirsten H Dillon, PhD, Durham VA Medical Center, Durham, NC
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Primary Completion (Estimated)
Study Completion (Estimated)
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Estimated)
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
- D4561-R
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.
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 Anger
-
Ege UniversityCompleted
-
naomi goldsteinNational Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)Completed
-
Walter Reed Army Institute of Research (WRAIR)Enrolling by invitation
-
Örebro University, SwedenKarolinska InstitutetCompletedMaladaptive Anger InhibitionSweden
-
Karolinska InstitutetCompletedInappropriate Anger ExpressionSweden
-
Florida State UniversityCompletedAnger | Smoking CessationUnited States
-
Kafkas UniversityCompleted
-
Mersin UniversityCompletedAnger Problems | Spiritual Well-beingTurkey (Türkiye)
-
Aydin Adnan Menderes UniversityCompletedAnger | Nurse's Role | Interpersonal RelationsTurkey
-
University of Colorado, DenverChildrens Hospital ColoradoRecruitingAnger | Irritable Mood | Temper TantrumUnited States
Clinical Trials on Mobile Anger Reduction Intervention (MARI)
-
VA Office of Research and DevelopmentCompletedAnger | Posttraumatic Stress DisorderUnited States
-
VA Office of Research and DevelopmentCompleted
-
Florida State UniversityCompletedAnger | Smoking CessationUnited States
-
Mersin UniversityCompletedAnger Problems | Spiritual Well-beingTurkey (Türkiye)
-
University Hospitals Cleveland Medical CenterEmory UniversityCompletedAcute Pain | Distal Pancreatectomy | Whipple ProcedureUnited States
-
Florida State UniversityCompletedAnger | Suicidal IdeationUnited States
-
Kailea ManningEdward Via Virginia College of Osteopathic MedicineNot yet recruitingMyofascial Pain SyndromeUnited States
-
Hospital Authority, Hong KongThe University of Hong KongCompleted
-
United States Department of DefenseCompleted
-
Ksana HealthNovo Nordisk A/SCompletedObesity | Overweight | Mental Health DisorderUnited States