Clinical trial NCT05490004: RISE With Veteran Service Providers
Official title: Evaluating an Educational Intervention for Improving Provider Recognition and Response to Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) Experienced by Veterans and Their Families - A Mixed Method Pilot Randomized Trial
Study type: INTERVENTIONAL
Overall status: UNKNOWN
Phase: NA
Conditions: Domestic Violence
Veterans Family
Veterans
Child Maltreatment
Keywords: Family Violence
Medical Education
Education Scholarship
Health Professions Education
Mandatory Reporting
Child Maltreatment
Intimate Partner Violence
Veterans
Veterans Family
Lead sponsor: McMaster University
Sponsor class: OTHER
Collaborators: name: Atlas Institute for Veterans and Families
First posted: 2022-08-05
Enrollment: 80
Sex: ALL
Minimum age (years): 18
Maximum age (years): 100
Standard ages: ADULT
OLDER_ADULT
Accepts healthy volunteers: yes
Allocation: RANDOMIZED
Intervention model: PARALLEL
Intervention model description: To determine the feasibility of evaluating the effectiveness of both of VEGA's educational approaches, as well as to generate preliminary estimates of effect for sampling and effect size calculations, a two-arm pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) will be used (Eldridge et al., 2016). Eligible participants will be randomly assigned to receive either self-directed (i.e., experimental) or facilitator-led (i.e., active control (AC)) VEGA.
Primary purpose: OTHER

Brief summary: Veterans and their families are more likely to experience forms of family violence like intimate-partner violence and child maltreatment. Evidence suggests that healthcare and social service providers (HSSPs) need more training to effectively and confidently recognize and respond to these situations. The Violence, Evidence, Guidance, Action (VEGA) Educational Intervention is a novel education intervention aimed at improving provider's preparation for these clinical encounters. The goal of this project is to determine the acceptability and feasibility of a future randomized-controlled trial comparing two approaches (facilitator-led VEGA or self-directed VEGA) to administering the VEGA training to understand whether/how these approaches can support HSSPs continued care of veterans and their families. The investigators aim to generate initial estimates of the effectiveness of both approaches in improving HSSPs knowledge and skills to effectively recognize and respond to intimate-partner violence and related forms of family violence, including child maltreatment. As well, the investigators aim to contribute to the knowledge base regarding optimal educational approaches for HSSP education in family violence.

The investigators hypothesize that there will be significant increases in preparedness, knowledge and skills, and self-efficacy to recognize and respond to both CM and IPV in both the experimental and AC arms from Time 1 (baseline) to Time 2 (immediately after the intervention) and Time 1 (baseline) to Time 3 (3 month follow-up). These improvements will be slightly attenuated in the experimental arm. Qualitative data pertaining to perceived value and impact will corroborate the quantitative findings.


Eligibility criteria: Inclusion Criteria:

* Participant is a regulated healthcare or social service provider that is an active member in good standing with the associated regulatory college.
* Participant is fluent in written and spoken English.
* We are looking for participants who are currently working with or have previous experience working with military and/or RCMP veterans or their family members. Participants must meet one of the following criteria:

  1. Participant works with military and/or RCMP veterans or family members of military and/or RCMP veterans in a direct service capacity at least one day per week OR
  2. Participant has two years or more of experience working with military and/or RCMP veterans or family members of military and/or RCMP veterans in a direct service capacity OR
  3. Participant has worked with 15 or more patients that were either military and/or RCMP veterans or family members of military and/or RCMP veterans in a direct service capacity.

Exclusion Criteria:

* Participant has previously accessed VEGA intervention materials.
* Participant is currently enrolled in or plans to enroll in any other educational intervention focused on family violence within the study time period (approximately next 3 months).

Primary outcomes:
measure: Number of Providers Who Meet Eligibility Criteria
timeFrame: Through study completion, an average of 4 months
measure: Number of Providers who Consent
timeFrame: Through study completion, an average of 4 months
measure: Number of Providers who Complete Assigned Intervention
timeFrame: Through study completion, an average of 4 months
measure: Number of Providers who Complete Assessments
timeFrame: Through study completion, an average of 4 months
Secondary outcomes:
measure: Child Maltreatment Vignette Scale
timeFrame: Time 1 (one week before intervention), Time 2 (immediately after the intervention), Time 3 (3 month follow-up)
measure: Child Maltreatment Knowledge and Skills Questions (Developed by VEGA Team)
timeFrame: Time 1 (one week before intervention), Time 2 (immediately after the intervention), Time 3 (3 month follow-up)
measure: The Physician Readiness to Manage Intimate Partner Violence Survey: IPV Knowledge
timeFrame: Time 1 (one week before intervention), Time 2 (immediately after the intervention), Time 3 (3 month follow-up)
measure: The Physician Readiness to Manage Intimate Partner Violence Survey: Preparedness Subscale
timeFrame: Time 1 (one week before intervention), Time 2 (immediately after the intervention), Time 3 (3 month follow-up)
measure: The Physician Readiness to Manage Intimate Partner Violence Survey: Opinions
timeFrame: Time 1 (one week before intervention), Time 3 (3 month follow-up)
measure: Mandatory Reporting Self-Efficacy Scale (MRSES)
timeFrame: Time 1 (one week before intervention), Time 2 (immediately after the intervention), Time 3 (3 month follow-up)
measure: Brief Individual Readiness for Change Scale
timeFrame: Time 1 (one week before intervention), Time 2 (immediately after the intervention)
Other outcomes:
measure: Previous Training in Intimate Partner Violence and Child Maltreatment
timeFrame: Time 1 (one week before intervention)
measure: Thoughts and Beliefs about Recognizing and Responding to IPV and CM in Professional Roles
timeFrame: Time 1 (one week before intervention), Time 2 (immediately after the intervention)
measure: Satisfaction with VEGA Training
timeFrame: Time 2 (immediately after the intervention)
measure: Demographics
timeFrame: Pre-Intervention
Locations:
city: Hamilton
country: Canada
facility: McMaster University
state: Ontario
Study officials:
affiliation: McMaster University
name: Melissa Kimber, PhD, MSW, RSW
role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
References:
citation: Eldridge SM, Lancaster GA, Campbell MJ, Thabane L, Hopewell S, Coleman CL, Bond CM. Defining Feasibility and Pilot Studies in Preparation for Randomised Controlled Trials: Development of a Conceptual Framework. PLoS One. 2016 Mar 15;11(3):e0150205. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0150205. eCollection 2016.
citation: Pelletier HL, Knox M. Incorporating Child Maltreatment Training into Medical School Curricula. J Child Adolesc Trauma. 2017;10(3):267-274. doi: 10.1007/s40653-016-0096-x. Epub 2016 May 12.
citation: Connor PD, Nouer SS, Mackey ST, Tipton NG, Lloyd AK. Psychometric properties of an intimate partner violence tool for health care students. J Interpers Violence. 2011 Mar;26(5):1012-35. doi: 10.1177/0886260510365872. Epub 2010 Jun 28.
citation: Short LM, Alpert E, Harris JM Jr, Surprenant ZJ. A tool for measuring physician readiness to manage intimate partner violence. Am J Prev Med. 2006 Feb;30(2):173-180. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2005.10.009.
citation: Mathews B, Kenny MC. Mandatory reporting legislation in the United States, Canada, and Australia: a cross-jurisdictional review of key features, differences, and issues. Child Maltreat. 2008 Feb;13(1):50-63. doi: 10.1177/1077559507310613.
citation: Afifi TO, Taillieu T, Zamorski MA, Turner S, Cheung K, Sareen J. Association of Child Abuse Exposure With Suicidal Ideation, Suicide Plans, and Suicide Attempts in Military Personnel and the General Population in Canada. JAMA Psychiatry. 2016 Mar;73(3):229-38. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2015.2732.
citation: Afifi TO, Sareen J, Taillieu T, Stewart-Tufescu A, Mota N, Bolton SL, Asmundson GJG, Enns MW, Ports KA, Jetly R. Association of Child Maltreatment and Deployment-related Traumatic Experiences with Mental Disorders in Active Duty Service Members and Veterans of the Canadian Armed Forces: Association de la Maltraitance des Enfants et des Experiences Traumatisantes Liees au Deploiement Avec les Troubles Mentaux Chez les Membres du Service Actif et Les Anciens Combattants des Forces Armees Canadiennes. Can J Psychiatry. 2021 Nov;66(11):961-970. doi: 10.1177/0706743720987086. Epub 2021 Jan 21.
citation: Marshall AD, Panuzio J, Taft CT. Intimate partner violence among military veterans and active duty servicemen. Clin Psychol Rev. 2005 Nov;25(7):862-76. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2005.05.009.
citation: Sparrow K, Kwan J, Howard L, Fear N, MacManus D. Systematic review of mental health disorders and intimate partner violence victimisation among military populations. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2017 Sep;52(9):1059-1080. doi: 10.1007/s00127-017-1423-8. Epub 2017 Jul 26.
citation: Griffith J, J Bryan C. Deployment Experiences and Suicidal Behaviors Related to Interpersonal Violence Perpetration Among Army National Guard Soldiers. Violence Vict. 2020 Dec 1;35(6):841-860. doi: 10.1891/VV-D-18-00174.
citation: Zamorski MA, Wiens-Kinkaid ME. Cross-sectional prevalence survey of intimate partner violence perpetration and victimization in Canadian military personnel. BMC Public Health. 2013 Oct 28;13:1019. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-1019.
citation: MacMillan HL, Kimber M, Stewart DE. Intimate Partner Violence: Recognizing and Responding Safely. JAMA. 2020 Sep 22;324(12):1201-1202. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.11322. No abstract available.
citation: Stewart DE, MacMillan H, Kimber M. Recognizing and Responding to Intimate Partner Violence: An Update. Can J Psychiatry. 2021 Jan;66(1):71-106. doi: 10.1177/0706743720939676. Epub 2020 Aug 10. No abstract available.
citation: Beynon CE, Gutmanis IA, Tutty LM, Wathen CN, MacMillan HL. Why physicians and nurses ask (or don't) about partner violence: a qualitative analysis. BMC Public Health. 2012 Jun 21;12:473. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-12-473.
citation: Kimber M, McTavish JR, Couturier J, Le Grange D, Lock J, MacMillan HL. Identifying and responding to child maltreatment when delivering family-based treatment-A qualitative study. Int J Eat Disord. 2019 Mar;52(3):292-298. doi: 10.1002/eat.23036. Epub 2019 Feb 6.
citation: Kimber M, McTavish JR, Luo C, Couturier J, Dimitropoulos G, MacMillan H. Mandatory reporting of child maltreatment when delivering family-based treatment for eating disorders: A framework analysis of practitioner experiences. Child Abuse Negl. 2019 Feb;88:118-128. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2018.11.010. Epub 2018 Nov 23.
citation: McTavish JR, Kimber M, Devries K, Colombini M, MacGregor JCD, Wathen CN, Agarwal A, MacMillan HL. Mandated reporters' experiences with reporting child maltreatment: a meta-synthesis of qualitative studies. BMJ Open. 2017 Oct 16;7(10):e013942. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013942.
citation: Alnasser Y, Albijadi A, Abdullah W, Aldabeeb D, Alomair A, Alsaddiqi S, Alsalloum Y. Child maltreatment between knowledge, attitude and beliefs among Saudi pediatricians, pediatric residency trainees and medical students. Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2017 Feb 21;16:7-13. doi: 10.1016/j.amsu.2017.02.008. eCollection 2017 Apr.
citation: Inanici SY, Celik E, Hidiroglu S, Ozdemir M, Inanici MA. Factors associated with physicians' assessment and management of child abuse and neglect: A mixed method study. J Forensic Leg Med. 2020 Jul;73:101972. doi: 10.1016/j.jflm.2020.101972. Epub 2020 May 30.
citation: Flaherty EG, Sege R, Price LL, Christoffel KK, Norton DP, O'Connor KG. Pediatrician characteristics associated with child abuse identification and reporting: results from a national survey of pediatricians. Child Maltreat. 2006 Nov;11(4):361-9. doi: 10.1177/1077559506292287.
citation: Flaherty EG, Sege R, Binns HJ, Mattson CL, Christoffel KK. Health care providers' experience reporting child abuse in the primary care setting. Pediatric Practice Research Group. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2000 May;154(5):489-93. doi: 10.1001/archpedi.154.5.489.
citation: Regnaut O, Jeu-Steenhouwer M, Manaouil C, Gignon M. Risk factors for child abuse: levels of knowledge and difficulties in family medicine. A mixed method study. BMC Res Notes. 2015 Oct 30;8:620. doi: 10.1186/s13104-015-1607-9.
citation: Flaherty EG, Sege R. Barriers to physician identification and reporting of child abuse. Pediatr Ann. 2005 May;34(5):349-56. doi: 10.3928/0090-4481-20050501-08.
citation: Norman GR, Sloan JA, Wyrwich KW. The truly remarkable universality of half a standard deviation: confirmation through another look. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2004 Oct;4(5):581-5. doi: 10.1586/14737167.4.5.581.
citation: Crowe M, Inder M, Porter R. Conducting qualitative research in mental health: Thematic and content analyses. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2015 Jul;49(7):616-23. doi: 10.1177/0004867415582053. Epub 2015 Apr 21.
citation: Guetterman TC, Fetters MD, Creswell JW. Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Results in Health Science Mixed Methods Research Through Joint Displays. Ann Fam Med. 2015 Nov;13(6):554-61. doi: 10.1370/afm.1865.
citation: Flaherty EG, Sege R, Mattson CL, Binns HJ. Assessment of suspicion of abuse in the primary care setting. Ambul Pediatr. 2002 Mar-Apr;2(2):120-6. doi: 10.1367/1539-4409(2002)0022.0.co;2.
citation: Vaismoradi M, Turunen H, Bondas T. Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study. Nurs Health Sci. 2013 Sep;15(3):398-405. doi: 10.1111/nhs.12048. Epub 2013 Mar 11.