Motivational Assessment Program to Initiate Treatment (MAPIT)
11 avril 2016 mis à jour par: University of North Texas Health Science Center
In-Person VS. Computer Interventions for Increasing Probation Compliance
Substance abuse treatment in the criminal justice system can reduce drug use and related criminal behavior.
Although drug and alcohol treatment are common mandates in criminal justice programs, only a minority of clients actually initiate treatment.
This proposal will compare two intervention formats that target motivation to initiate and engage in treatment among a group of probationers who have drug or alcohol treatment conditions.
Six hundred drug and alcohol offenders in two probation sites (Baltimore, MD and Dallas, TX) will be randomized to receive: 1) an in-person motivational interviewing session (MI), 2) a motivational computer program (MC), or 3) supervision intake and monitoring as usual (SAU).
The MI condition will be structured along the lines of the "Check-Up" format which consists of an assessment and personalized feedback delivered in an MI style; the content of the MC condition will be drawn from previous literature on effective motivational computer programs.
Both interventions will be delivered at the start of the probation process, with follow-up assessments at 2 and 6 months.
Primary outcomes include engagement and participation in substance abuse treatment; secondary outcomes include drug and alcohol use, probation progress, criminal behavior, and HIV testing and care.
This project will be the first to develop and test two interventions for encouraging criminal justice clients to follow through with treatment recommendations, with the goal of increasing treatment initiation, and reducing subsequent drug use and criminal behavior.
It also contributes to ongoing partnerships with two large probation agencies-the Dallas County Supervision and Corrections Department and the Maryland Division of Parole and Probation.
Aperçu de l'étude
Statut
Complété
Les conditions
Intervention / Traitement
Description détaillée
Specific Aims
- Develop two intervention formats (Motivational Interviewing (MI) and Motivational Computer (MC)) for increasing motivation to initiate and engage in substance abuse treatment and/or HIV / AIDS testing and, if appropriate, HIV care.
- Test the efficacy of MI and MC on treatment initiation and participation, substance abuse, HIV testing/care, and recidivism, as compared to Supervision As Usual (SAU);
- Evaluate offender characteristics (e.g., risk level, gender, ethnicity, motivation) as potential moderators of the intervention effect; and,
- Assess the relative cost and cost-effectiveness of MI and MC on substance abuse treatment and/or linkage to or participation in HIV/AIDS care, supervision outcomes, recidivism, and substance abuse.
Type d'étude
Interventionnel
Inscription (Réel)
380
Phase
- N'est pas applicable
Contacts et emplacements
Cette section fournit les coordonnées de ceux qui mènent l'étude et des informations sur le lieu où cette étude est menée.
Lieux d'étude
-
-
Texas
-
Fort Worth, Texas, États-Unis, 76107
- University of North Texas Health Science Center
-
-
Virginia
-
Fairfax, Virginia, États-Unis, 22030
- George Mason University
-
-
Critères de participation
Les chercheurs recherchent des personnes qui correspondent à une certaine description, appelée critères d'éligibilité. Certains exemples de ces critères sont l'état de santé général d'une personne ou des traitements antérieurs.
Critère d'éligibilité
Âges éligibles pour étudier
18 ans et plus (Adulte, Adulte plus âgé)
Accepte les volontaires sains
Non
Sexes éligibles pour l'étude
Tout
La description
Inclusion Criteria:
- >=18 years old
- Drug or Alcohol use in the last 90 days
Exclusion Criteria:
- <18 years old
- Cannot speak English
- Already participate in a substance abuse treatment
Plan d'étude
Cette section fournit des détails sur le plan d'étude, y compris la façon dont l'étude est conçue et ce que l'étude mesure.
Comment l'étude est-elle conçue ?
Détails de conception
- Objectif principal: Traitement
- Répartition: Randomisé
- Modèle interventionnel: Affectation parallèle
- Masquage: Aucun (étiquette ouverte)
Armes et Interventions
Groupe de participants / Bras |
Intervention / Traitement |
|---|---|
|
Expérimental: Motivational Interviewing
Participants randomized to the MI group will receive a single 60-minute MI session focused on motivation to initiate and engage in treatment.
The MI session will be organized around the "Check-Up" format, with additional planning components as desired by the client.
|
MI is a "client centered, directive style of interacting with a person to help explore and resolve ambivalence about change" (Miller & Rollnick, 2002).
MI borrows from Client-Centered Counseling in its emphasis on empathy, optimism, and respect for client choice (Rogers, 1961).
MI also draws from Self-Perception Theory, which says that a person becomes more or less committed to an action based on the verbal stance he or she takes (Bem, 1972).
The effects of MI tend to be in the small-to-medium range when compared to no treatment, and nonsignificant when compared to more extensive treatment.
Autres noms:
|
|
Aucune intervention: Supervision As Usual
Participants randomized to the SAU group will receive the standard agency intake process as well as baseline and follow-up research interviews, but will not receive any additional intervention as part of the study.
They will be referred to a treatment program as per the normal routine.
|
|
|
Expérimental: Motivational Computer
Participants randomized to the MC group will complete a 60 minute computer intervention focused on motivation to initiate and engage in treatment.
The program will be self-guided, interactive, and to the extent possible, will mirror the features of MI session.
The MC program will have two main components: a motivation component and a planning component.
|
The growing use of technology has led to the development of automated interventions for behavior change, including some that target drug and alcohol use (Elliott, et al, 2008; Lustria, et al, 2009; Revere & Dunbar, 2001; Walters, et al, 2006) and treatment interest (Lieberman & Massey, 2008).
As discussed by Hester & Miller (2006), automated interventions have several potential advantages over face-to-face interventions: (I) They require little or no staff contact, which may increase cost-effectiveness; (2) they can allow for automatic data collection and follow-up; and (3) they can be disseminated with little loss of fidelity.
Autres noms:
|
Que mesure l'étude ?
Principaux critères de jugement
Mesure des résultats |
Description de la mesure |
Délai |
|---|---|---|
|
Treatment Progress
Délai: 6 months
|
Treatment progress assesses initiation, engagement and retention at 2 and 6 months via telephone.
In-person visits are assessed at baseline and during a 6 month visit.
|
6 months
|
Mesures de résultats secondaires
Mesure des résultats |
Description de la mesure |
Délai |
|---|---|---|
|
Drug and Alcohol Use
Délai: 6 months
|
Drug and alcohol use is a secondary outcome measured at baseline and 6 months during an in-person interview.
In addition, this outcome is measured at 2 via telephone.
|
6 months
|
|
Probation Progress
Délai: 6 months
|
Probation progress is measured at baseline and 6 months via in-person interview.
In addition, this outcome is measured at 2 via a telephone interview.
|
6 months
|
|
Criminal Behavior
Délai: 6 months
|
Criminal Behavior is measured during in-person interviews at baseline and 6 months.
In addition, this outcome is measured at 2 months via telephone.
|
6 months
|
Collaborateurs et enquêteurs
C'est ici que vous trouverez les personnes et les organisations impliquées dans cette étude.
Collaborateurs
Les enquêteurs
- Chercheur principal: Scott T Walters, PhD, UNT Health Science Center
Publications et liens utiles
La personne responsable de la saisie des informations sur l'étude fournit volontairement ces publications. Il peut s'agir de tout ce qui concerne l'étude.
Publications générales
- Walters ST, Ondersma SJ, Ingersoll KS, Rodriguez M, Lerch J, Rossheim ME, Taxman FS. MAPIT: development of a web-based intervention targeting substance abuse treatment in the criminal justice system. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2014 Jan;46(1):60-5. doi: 10.1016/j.jsat.2013.07.003. Epub 2013 Aug 16.
- Reingle Gonzalez JM, Walters ST, Lerch J, Taxman FS. The Relationship Between Drug Use, Drug-related Arrests, and Chronic Pain Among Adults on Probation. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2015 Jun;53:33-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jsat.2014.12.005. Epub 2014 Dec 30.
- Rodriguez M, Walters ST, Houck JM, Ortiz JA, Taxman FS. The language of change among criminal justice clients: Counselor language, client language, and client substance use outcomes. J Clin Psychol. 2018 Apr;74(4):626-636. doi: 10.1002/jclp.22534. Epub 2017 Sep 22.
- Lerch J, Walters ST, Tang L, Taxman FS. Effectiveness of a computerized motivational intervention on treatment initiation and substance use: Results from a randomized trial. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2017 Sep;80:59-66. doi: 10.1016/j.jsat.2017.07.002. Epub 2017 Jul 6.
- Spohr SA, Taxman FS, Rodriguez M, Walters ST. Motivational Interviewing Fidelity in a Community Corrections Setting: Treatment Initiation and Subsequent Drug Use. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2016 Jun;65:20-5. doi: 10.1016/j.jsat.2015.07.012. Epub 2015 Jul 29.
- Taxman FS, Walters ST, Sloas LB, Lerch J, Rodriguez M. Motivational tools to improve probationer treatment outcomes. Contemp Clin Trials. 2015 Jul;43:120-8. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2015.05.016. Epub 2015 May 22.
Dates d'enregistrement des études
Ces dates suivent la progression des dossiers d'étude et des soumissions de résultats sommaires à ClinicalTrials.gov. Les dossiers d'étude et les résultats rapportés sont examinés par la Bibliothèque nationale de médecine (NLM) pour s'assurer qu'ils répondent à des normes de contrôle de qualité spécifiques avant d'être publiés sur le site Web public.
Dates principales de l'étude
Début de l'étude
1 juin 2012
Achèvement primaire (Réel)
1 juin 2015
Achèvement de l'étude (Réel)
1 février 2016
Dates d'inscription aux études
Première soumission
18 octobre 2011
Première soumission répondant aux critères de contrôle qualité
28 juin 2013
Première publication (Estimation)
3 juillet 2013
Mises à jour des dossiers d'étude
Dernière mise à jour publiée (Estimation)
13 avril 2016
Dernière mise à jour soumise répondant aux critères de contrôle qualité
11 avril 2016
Dernière vérification
1 avril 2016
Plus d'information
Termes liés à cette étude
Mots clés
Termes MeSH pertinents supplémentaires
Autres numéros d'identification d'étude
- R01DA029010-01 (Subvention/contrat des NIH des États-Unis)
- 5R01DA029010-06 (Subvention/contrat des NIH des États-Unis)
Plan pour les données individuelles des participants (IPD)
Prévoyez-vous de partager les données individuelles des participants (DPI) ?
NON
Ces informations ont été extraites directement du site Web clinicaltrials.gov sans aucune modification. Si vous avez des demandes de modification, de suppression ou de mise à jour des détails de votre étude, veuillez contacter register@clinicaltrials.gov. Dès qu'un changement est mis en œuvre sur clinicaltrials.gov, il sera également mis à jour automatiquement sur notre site Web .