Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| Penn Innovation in Suicide Prevention for Implementation Research (INSPIRE) Center | UNKNOWN |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Individuals with first-episode psychosis (FEP) are at high-risk for several poor functional and clinical outcomes, including suicide. Coordinated Specialty Care (CSC) is a multidisciplinary, team-based intervention known to improve such outcomes, including suicide risk. However, 30-50% of patients disengage from CSC, thereby limiting its impact. This pilot study will develop and test feasibility of a behavioral change program that uses moderate financial incentives to encourage treatment engagement in 2 CSC programs. A single-arm of 80 patient-participants at these two clinics will be recruited to assess feasibility and acceptability from patient perspectives. Additionally,15 clinicians at these two clinics will be recruited to assess feasibility and acceptability from clinician perspectives, and 50 clinicians from peer clinics not involved in the intervention will be recruited to assess scalability of the intervention. The trial will feature an three-month period for recruitment and baseline data collection and will subsequently feature three intervention periods (3 months each) where modifications to the interventions will be tested (each informed by the feasibility and acceptability findings of the prior period) with the aim of sequentially improving it.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Financial Incentive and Text-Messages | Behavioral | Patient-participants will receive modest financial incentive for attending therapy or medication management appointments combined with text messages to encourage attendance at these appointments. Text messages will be informed by principles of behavioral economics. Maximum incentive = $50/month if all appointments attended. Incentives will be pro-rated by percentage of appointments attended. Pro-rating strategies (e.g., uniform amount per appointment, escalating [aka, 'back-loaded'], or decreasing [aka 'frontloaded'] will be sequentially changed based on acceptability and other intervention-related data gathered from participants during the trial. Clinician-participants will not receive any intervention, but will receive surveys and interviews to assess their perceptions about the optimization, acceptability, scalability, and other implementation barriers/facilitators for the intervention. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Acceptability of intervention measure (AIM) | The AIM is a 4-item scale measuring acceptability. Each item is scored 1-5 with 5 indicating greater acceptability. Minimum score is 4; maximum is 20. | Change at 8 months |
| Acceptability of intervention measure (AIM) | The AIM is a 4-item scale measuring acceptability. Each item is scored 1-5 with 5 indicating greater acceptability. Minimum score is 4; maximum is 20. | Change at 6 months |
| Acceptability of intervention measure (AIM) | The AIM is a 4-item scale measuring acceptability. Each item is scored 1-5 with 5 indicating greater acceptability. Minimum score is 4; maximum is 20. | Change at 4 months |
| Feasibility of intervention measure (FIM) | The FIM is a 4-item scale measuring feasibility. Each item is scored 1-5 with 5 indicating greater feasibility. Minimum score is 4; maximum is 20. | Change at 8 months |
| Feasibility of intervention measure (FIM) | The FIM is a 4-item scale measuring feasibility. Each item is scored 1-5 with 5 indicating greater feasibility. Minimum score is 4; maximum is 20. | Change at 6 months |
| Feasibility of intervention measure (FIM) | The FIM is a 4-item scale measuring feasibility. Each item is scored 1-5 with 5 indicating greater feasibility. Minimum score is 4; maximum is 20. | Change at 4 months |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Implementation Survey Response | Implementation survey. Results will be used to optimize intervention from implementation perspective. | Change at 8 months |
| Implementation Survey Response | Implementation survey. Results will be used to optimize intervention from implementation perspective. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| attrition | rate of attrition | Change at 8 months |
| attrition | rate of attrition | Change at 6 months |
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (ENCOMPASS Program) | Raleigh | North Carolina | 27608 | United States | ||
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Change at 6 months |
| Implementation Survey Response | Implementation survey. Results will be used to optimize intervention from implementation perspective. | Change at 4 months |
| Motivation Survey Response | Motivation survey. Results will be used to optimize intervention from motivation perspective. | Change at 8 months |
| Motivation Survey Response | Motivation survey. Results will be used to optimize intervention from motivation perspective. | Change at 6 months |
| Motivation Survey Response | Motivation survey. Results will be used to optimize intervention from motivation perspective. | Change at 4 months |
| Ethical Concern Survey Response | Ethical concern survey. Results will be used to optimize intervention from ethical acceptability perspective. | Change at 8 months |
| Ethical Concern Survey Response | Ethical concern survey. Results will be used to optimize intervention from ethical acceptability perspective. | Change at 6 months |
| Ethical Concern Survey Response | Ethical concern survey. Results will be used to optimize intervention from ethical acceptability perspective. | Change at 4 months |
| attrition | rate of attrition | Change at 4 months |
| psychotic symptomology | Compass-10. The Compass-10 is a self-report scale that measures multiple symptoms associated with psychosis, including mood symptoms. It consists of 10-items, each scored 0-6 with a minimum score of 0 and a maximum of 60. A higher score indicates greater symptomology. | Change at 8 months |
| psychotic symptomology | Compass-10. The Compass-10 is a self-report scale that measures multiple symptoms associated with psychosis, including mood symptoms. It consists of 10-items, each scored 0-6 with a minimum score of 0 and a maximum of 60. A higher score indicates greater symptomology. | Change at 6 months |
| psychotic symptomology | Compass-10. The Compass-10 is a self-report scale that measures multiple symptoms associated with psychosis, including mood symptoms. It consists of 10-items, each scored 0-6 with a minimum score of 0 and a maximum of 60. A higher score indicates greater symptomology. | Change at 4 months |
| psychotic symptomology | modified-Colorado Symptom Index. The modified-Colorado Symptom Index is a 14-item, clinician-rated scale with items ranked 0-4. Total minimum score = 0. Total maximum score = 56. A higher score indicates greater symptomology. | Change at 8 months |
| psychotic symptomology | modified-Colorado Symptom Index. The modified-Colorado Symptom Index is a 14-item, clinician-rated scale with items ranked 0-4. Total minimum score = 0. Total maximum score = 56. A higher score indicates greater symptomology. | Change at 6 months |
| psychotic symptomology | modified-Colorado Symptom Index. The modified-Colorado Symptom Index is a 14-item, clinician-rated scale with items ranked 0-4. Total minimum score = 0. Total maximum score = 56. A higher score indicates greater symptomology. | Change at 4 months |
| depression | abbreviated version of the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) that has been previously validated (scale, min=0, max=21, higher mean score indicates more severe depressive symptomology) | Change at 8 months |
| depression | abbreviated version of the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) that has been previously validated (scale, min=0, max=21, higher mean score indicates more severe depressive symptomology) | Change at 6 months |
| depression | abbreviated version of the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) that has been previously validated (scale, min=0, max=21, higher mean score indicates more severe depressive symptomology) | Change at 4 months |
| quality of life | 4-item version of the Lehman Quality of Life Scale (min = 4, max =28, higher score is improved quality of life) | Change at 8 months |
| quality of life | 4-item version of the Lehman Quality of Life Scale (min = 4, max =28, higher score is improved quality of life) | Change at 6 months |
| quality of life | 4-item version of the Lehman Quality of Life Scale (min = 4, max =28, higher score is improved quality of life) | Change at 4 months |
| recovery | 5-item version of the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery (scale, min=5, max=25, higher mean indicates more perceived recovery) | Change at 8 months |
| recovery | 5-item version of the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery (scale, min=5, max=25, higher mean indicates more perceived recovery) | Change at 6 months |
| recovery | 5-item version of the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery (scale, min=5, max=25, higher mean indicates more perceived recovery) | Change at 4 months |
| treatment motivation (intrinsic versus extrinsic) | Treatment Motivation Questionnaire-Revised (TMQ-R). The Treatment Motivation Questionnaire-Revised is a 25-item self-assessment survey that assesses several elements of treatment motivation, each ranked 1-5. It is not a single scale that results in an overall score. Some items suggest greatest motivation at a 5 and least at a 1, but others suggest greatest motivation at a 1 and least at a 5. | Change at 8 months |
| treatment motivation (intrinsic versus extrinsic) | Treatment Motivation Questionnaire-Revised (TMQ-R). The Treatment Motivation Questionnaire-Revised is a 25-item self-assessment survey that assesses several elements of treatment motivation, each ranked 1-5. It is not a single scale that results in an overall score. Some items suggest greatest motivation at a 5 and least at a 1, but others suggest greatest motivation at a 1 and least at a 5. | Change at 6 months |
| treatment motivation (intrinsic versus extrinsic) | Treatment Motivation Questionnaire-Revised (TMQ-R). The Treatment Motivation Questionnaire-Revised is a 25-item self-assessment survey that assesses several elements of treatment motivation, each ranked 1-5. It is not a single scale that results in an overall score. Some items suggest greatest motivation at a 5 and least at a 1, but others suggest greatest motivation at a 1 and least at a 5. | Change at 4 months |
| Perceived coercion | Modified version of the MacArthur Admission Experience Survey (AES). The MacArthur AES was developed as a self-assessment for assessing coercion and pressure during inpatient admission. It was previously modified for assisted outpatient treatment. We have modified it further to a 13-item scale for outpatient treatment generally. Each item is assessed as true or false, where true suggests great perception of pressure or coercion on some items, but less on others. | Change at 8 months |
| Perceived coercion | Modified version of the MacArthur Admission Experience Survey (AES). The MacArthur AES was developed as a self-assessment for assessing coercion and pressure during inpatient admission. It was previously modified for assisted outpatient treatment. We have modified it further to a 13-item scale for outpatient treatment generally. Each item is assessed as true or false, where true suggests great perception of pressure or coercion on some items, but less on others. | Change at 6 months |
| Perceived coercion | Modified version of the MacArthur Admission Experience Survey (AES). The MacArthur AES was developed as a self-assessment for assessing coercion and pressure during inpatient admission. It was previously modified for assisted outpatient treatment. We have modified it further to a 13-item scale for outpatient treatment generally. Each item is assessed as true or false, where true suggests great perception of pressure or coercion on some items, but less on others. | Change at 4 months |
| attendance rate | number of appointments attended in a given period divided by number of appointments scheduled | Change over 8 months |
| attendance rate | number of appointments attended in a given period divided by number of appointments scheduled | Change at 6 months |
| attendance rate | number of appointments attended in a given period divided by number of appointments scheduled | Change at 4 months |
| PEACE Program, Horizon House, Inc. |
| Philadelphia |
| Pennsylvania |
| 19123 |
| United States |
| University of Pennsylvania | Philadephia | Pennsylvania | 19104 | United States |