A cluster randomized Hybrid Type III trial testing an implementation support strategy to facilitate the use of an evidence-based practice in VA homeless programs

Implementation Science

Mark Glickman³  Leon Sawh⁵  Gordon Hannah²  Sharon McCarthy²  Matthew Chinman¹  David A. Smelson⁴ 

[1] RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, USA;VISN 4 Mental Illness Research and Clinical Center, VA Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA;Department of Health Policy and Management, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA;Department of Psychiatry, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA;VA National Center on Homelessness Among Veterans, Bedford, MA, USA

关键词: Technical assistance;    Training;    Fidelity;    Co-occurring disorders;    Implementation support;   

Others  :  1219027
DOI  :  10.1186/s13012-015-0267-4

 received in 2015-02-27, accepted in 2015-05-15,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

The Housing and Urban Development-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (HUD-VASH) program is one of the largest initiatives to end Veteran homelessness. However, mental health and substance use disorders continue to reduce client stability and impede program success. HUD-VASH programs do not consistently employ evidence-based practices that address co-occurring mental health and substance use disorders. This paper presents a study protocol to evaluate the implementation of an evidence-based, co-occurring disorder treatment called Maintaining Independence and Sobriety Through Systems Integration, Outreach, and Networking—Veterans Edition (MISSION-Vet) in HUD-VASH using an implementation strategy called Getting To Outcomes (GTO).

Methods/design

In three large VA Medical Centers, this Hybrid Type III trial will randomize case managers and their clients by HUD-VASH sub-teams to receive either MISSION-Vet Implementation as Usual (IU—standard training and access to the MISSION-Vet treatment manuals) or MISSION-Vet implementation augmented by GTO. In addition to testing GTO, effectiveness of the treatment (MISSION-Vet) will be assessed using existing Veteran-level data from the HUD-VASH data monitoring system. This project will compare GTO and IU case managers and their clients on the following variables: (1) fidelity to the MISSION-Vet intervention; (2) proportion of time the Veteran is housed; (3) mental health, substance use, and functional outcomes among Veterans; and (4) factors key to the successful deployment of a new treatment as specified by the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) model.

Discussion

This project is an important step for developing an implementation strategy to increase adoption of evidence-based practice use in VA homeless programs, and to further examine efficacy of MISSION-Vet in HUD-VASH. This project has important implications for program managers, policy makers, and researchers within the homelessness field. VA Central IRB approval for this study was granted in October 2011. The three sites were trained on MISSION-Vet and GTO in the first half of 2013. The first GTO planning meetings began after training occurred, between January 2013 and November 2013, across the three sites. The data collection—via a fidelity measure embedded into the VA Computerized Patient Record System—began as each site initiated MISSION-Vet, between April 2013 and January 2014.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01430741 webcite

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Smelson et al.; licensee BioMed Central.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Shinseki E. Secretary Shinseki Details Plan to End Homelessness for Veterans. 2009.
• [2]Opening Doors: a federal and strategic plan to prevent and end homelessness. USICH, Washington, DC; 2010.
• [3]Shinseki E. HUD to provide permanent housing to nearly 8 000 homeless veterans. 2015. hud.gov/portal/page/portal/HUD/press/press_releases_media_advisories/2010/HUDNo.10-117. 2010. Accessed 4 Feb.
• [4]Smelson D, Sawh L, Kuhn J, Kane V, Ziedonis D. The MISSION-VET Treatment Manual: VA. Bedford, MA, Department of Veterans Affairs; 2011.
• [5]Smelson D, Sawh L, Rodrigues S, Muñoz E, Marzilli A, Tripp J. The MISSION-VET Consumer Workbook. Bedford, MA, Department of Veterans Affairs; 2011.
• [6]O’Connell M, Kasprow W, Rosenheck R. National dissemination of supported housing in the VA: model adherence versus model modification. Psychiatr Rehabil J. 2010; 33(4):308-19.
• [7]Kertesz S, Crouch K, Milby J, Cusimano R, Schumacher J. Housing first for homeless persons with active addiction: are we overreaching? Milbank Q. 2009; 87(2):495-534.
• [8]Schoenwald S, Hoagwood K. Effectiveness transportability and dissemination of interventions: what matters when? Psychiatr Serv. 2001; 52(9):1190-7.
• [9]Ennett S, Ringwalt C, Thorne J, Rohrbach L, Vincus A, Simons-Rudolph A et al.. A comparison of current practice in school-based substance use prevention programs with meta-analysis findings. Prev Sci. 2003; 4(1):1.
• [10]McCormick L, Steckler A, McLeroy K. Diffusion of innovations in schools: a study of adoption and implementation of school-based tobacco prevention curricula. Am J Health Promo. 1995; 9:210-9.
• [11]Parcel G, Eriksen M, Lovato C, Gottlieb N, Brink S, Green L. The diffusion of school-based tobacco-use prevention programs: project description and baseline data. Health Educ. 1989; 4(1):111-24.
• [12]Rohrbach L, D’Onofrio C, Backer T, Montgomery S. Diffusion of school-based substance abuse prevention programs. Am Behav Sci. 1996; 39(7):919-34.
• [13]Rohrbach L, Graham J, Hansen W. Diffusion of a school-based substance abuse prevention program: predictors of program implementation. Prev Med. 1993; 22(2):237-60.
• [14]Steckler A. Toward integrating qualitative and quantitative methods. Health Educ Q. 1992; 19(1):1.
• [15]Cividin T, Ottoson J. Linking reasons for continuing professional education participation with post-program application. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 1997; 17:46-55.
• [16]Chinman M, Hunter S, Ebener P, Paddock S, Stillman L, Imm P et al.. The getting to outcomes demonstration and evaluation: an illustration of the prevention support system. Am J Community Psychol. 2008; 41(3):206-24.
• [17]HUD-VASH Vouchers. 2014.
• [18]Kane V. National Center of Homelessness Among Veterans. Washington, DC, VA Homelessness Services; 2010.
• [19]Donner A, Klar N. Pitfalls and controversies in cluster randomization trials. Am J Pub Health. 2004; 94:416.
• [20]Curran G, Bauer M, Mittman B, Stetler C, Pyne J, Fortney J. A new ‘Hybrid’? Combining elements of clinical effectiveness and implementation research trials. Poster presented at the VA HSR&D field-based meeting on mental health and substance use disorders, Little Rock, AR; 2010.
• [21]Curran G, Bauer M, Pyne J, Stetler C. Effectiveness-implementation hybrid designs: combining elements of clinical effectiveness and implementation research to enhance public health impact. Med Care. 2012; 50(3):217-26.
• [22]Becker M. The health belief model and personal health behavior. Health Educ. 1974; 2:324-508.
• [23]Susser E, Valencia E, Conover S, Felix A, Tsai W, Wyatt R. Preventing recurrent homelessness among mentally ill men: a “critical time” intervention after being discharged from a shelter. Am J Pub Health. 1997; 87(2):256.
• [24]Ziedonis D, Stern R. Dual recovery therapy for schizophrenia and substance abuse. Psychiatr Ann. 2001; 31:255.
• [25]Ziedonis D, Brady K. Dual diagnosis in primary care: detecting and treating both the addiction and mental illness. Med Clin North Am. 1997; 81(4):1017-36.
• [26]Ziedonis D, Smelson D, Rosenthal R, Batki S, Green A, Henry R et al.. Improving the care of individuals with schizophrenia and substance use disorders: consensus recommendations. J Psychiatr Pract. 2005; 11(5):315.
• [27]Miller W, Rollnick S. Motivational interviewing: preparing people for change. Guildford, London; 2002.
• [28]Marlatt G, Gordon J. Relapse prevention: maintenance strategies in addictive behavior change. Guilford, New York; 1985.
• [29]Bond G, McHugo G, Becker D, Rapp C, Whitley R. Fidelity of supported employment: lessons learned from the national evidence-based practice project. Psychiatr Rehabil J. 2008; 31(4):300-5.
• [30]Najavits L. Expanding the boundaries of PTSD treatment. JAMA. 2012; 308(7):714-6.
• [31]Smelson D, Losonczy M, Castles-Fonseca K, Stewart P, Kaune M, Ziedonis D. Preliminary outcomes from a booster case management program for individuals with a co-occurring substance abuse and a persistent psychiatric disorder. J Dual Diagn. 2005; 3(1):47-59.
• [32]Smelson D, Williams J, Ziedonis D, Losonczy M, Kaune M. The efficacy of clonazepam for decreasing cue-elicited craving in individuals with schizophrenia and cocaine dependence: a preliminary report. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2007; 1:9-12.
• [33]Smelson D, Kalman D, Losonczy M, Kline A, Sambamoorthi U, Hill L, et al. A brief treatment engagement intervention for individuals with co-occurring mental illness and substance use disorders: results of a randomized clinical trial. Community Ment Health J. 2012;1–6.
• [34]Smelson D, Kline A, Kuhn J, Rodrigues S, O’Connor K, Fisher W et al.. Wraparound treatment engagement intervention for homeless veterans with co-occurring disorders. Psychol Serv. 2013; 10(2):161-7.
• [35]Fetterman D, Wandersman A. Empowerment evaluation principles in practice. Guilford Press, New York; 2005.
• [36]Bandura A. Health promotion by social cognitive means. Health Educ Behav. 2004; 31(2):143.
• [37]Fishbein M, Ajzen I. Attitudes towards objects as predictors of single and multiple behavioral criteria. Psychol Rev. 1974; 81(1):59-74.
• [38]Durlak J, DuPre E. Implementation matters: a review of research on the influence of implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting implementation. Am J Community Psychol. 2008; 41(3):327-50.
• [39]Acosta J, Chinman M, Ebener P, Malone P, Paddock S, Phillips A et al.. An intervention to improve program implementation: findings from a two-year cluster randomized trial of assets-getting to outcomes. Implement Sci. 2013; 8:87. BioMed Central Full Text
• [40]Chinman M, Acosta J, Ebener P, Burkhart Q, Clifford M, Corsello M et al.. Intervening with practitioners to improve the quality of prevention: one year findings from a randomized controlled trial of the assets-getting to outcomes intervention. J Prim Prev. 2010; 34:173-91.
• [41]Chinman M, Tremain B, Imm P, Wandersman A. Strengthening prevention performance using technology: a formative evaluation of interactive Getting To OutcomesTM. Am J Orthopsychiatr. 2009; 79:469-81.
• [42]Kitson A, Harvey G, McCormack B. Enabling the implementation of evidence based practice: a conceptual framework. Qual Health Care. 1998; 7:149-58.
• [43]Rycroft-Malone J, Harvey G, Seers K, Kitson A, McCormack B, Titchen A. An exploration of the factors that influence the implementation of evidence into practice. J Clin Nurs. 2002; 13:913-24.
• [44]Hannah G, McCarthy S, Chinman M. Getting to outcomes in services for homeless veterans: 10 steps for achieving results-based accountability. National Center on Homelessness Among Veterans, Philadelphia, PA; 2010.
• [45]Lesesne C, Lewis K, White C, Greem D, Duffy J, Wandersman A. Promoting science-based approaches to teen pregnancy prevention: proactively engaging the three systems of the interactive systems framework. Am J Community Psychol. 2008; 41:379-92.
• [46]McLellan A, Kushner H, Metzger D, Peters R. The fifth edition of the Addiction Severity Index. J Subst Abuse Treat. 1992; 9(3):199-213.
• [47]Jones S, Thornicroft G, Coffey M, Dunn G. A brief mental health outcome scale-reliability and validity of the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF). BR J Psyciatry. 1995; 166(5):654-9.
• [48]Russell F, Glasgow RE, Thomas M, Vogt TM, Shawn M, Boles SM et al.. Am J Pub Health. 1999; 89:1322-7.
• [49]Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang AG, Buchner A. G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods. 2007; 39:175-91.
• [50]Hox J. Multilevel analysis: techniques and application. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ; 2002.
• [51]Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ; 1988.