search
Back to results

Preventing Substance Use Among Youth

Primary Purpose

Substance Abuse

Status
Completed
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
United States
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Enhanced Replicating Effective Programs (Enhanced REP)
Standard implementation
Sponsored by
Wayne State University
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional prevention trial for Substance Abuse

Eligibility Criteria

14 Years - 99 Years (Child, Adult, Older Adult)All SexesAccepts Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Schools which fail to meet state standards for implementation (less than 80% of curriculum) and/or face one or more barriers to MMH implementation

Exclusion Criteria:

  • None

Sites / Locations

  • Wayne State University

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm Type

Active Comparator

Experimental

Arm Label

Standard MMH Curriculum Implementation

Michigan Model for Health: Learning to Enhance and Adapt for Prevention (MI-LEAP)

Arm Description

Teachers will receive the MMH curriculum manual, standard training and as-needed technical assistance, provided to them by the health coordinators

We will deploy Enhanced REP to include additional tailoring of the MMH curriculum to include trauma-informed approaches, tailored trauma-focused curriculum training, and implementation facilitation, ongoing specialized implementation support.

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

Curriculum Feasibility
To evaluate comprehensively curriculum feasibility, the investigators adopt a convergent mixed methods design. The purpose of a convergent design is to obtain complementary, though different, data on the same topic. Weiner et al.'s measures will be used to assess feasibility. Each construct has 4 items (e.g., REP is appealing, REP seems suitable), from 1: Strongly disagree to 5: Strongly agree. The investigators will use the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) interview guide to guide the qualitative investigation of using Enhanced REP for MMH. The interview guide will be designed to elicit specific feedback on Enhanced REP components (manual, training, and facilitation) and their feasibility to deliver MMH.
Curriculum Acceptability
To evaluate comprehensively curriculum acceptability, the researchers adopt a convergent mixed methods design. The purpose of a convergent design is to obtain complementary, though different, data on the same topic. Weiner et al.'s measures will be used to assess acceptability. Each construct has 4 items (e.g., REP is appealing, REP seems suitable), from 1: Strongly disagree to 5: Strongly agree. The investigators will use the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) interview guide to guide the qualitative investigation of using Enhanced REP for MMH. The interview guide will be designed to elicit specific feedback on Enhanced REP components (manual, training, and facilitation) and their acceptability to deliver MMH.
Curriculum Appropriateness
To evaluate comprehensively appropriateness the investigators adopt a convergent mixed methods design. The purpose of a convergent design is to obtain complementary, though different, data on the same topic. Weiner et al.'s measures will be used to assess appropriateness. Each construct has 4 items (e.g., REP is appealing, REP seems suitable), from 1: Strongly disagree to 5: Strongly agree. The investigators will use the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) interview guide to guide the qualitative investigation of using Enhanced REP for MMH. The interview guide will be designed to elicit specific feedback on Enhanced REP components (manual, training, and facilitation) and their appropriateness to deliver MMH.
Cost-Effectiveness
Implementation cost measures are guided by Costs of Implementing New Strategies (COINS) and include implementation strategy costs across phases of implementation relevant for replication. The investigators will measure implementation costs using a micro-costing approach to assess labor and non-labor costs. The investigators will also use available cost data from the school district as needed, summary data from previous empirical studies on implementation costs, and routinely available cost data using market prices. Net costs (net increase in costs from the Enhanced REP condition versus standard implementation) and net effectiveness (net decrease in substance use from the Enhanced REP condition versus standard implementation) will be used to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Substance Use
The investigators will assess past substance use using items from Monitoring the Future (MTF) with adapted response options and timeframe.
Student Engagement
The investigators will assess student engagement using student satisfaction and key intervention skills. The satisfaction measure will be adapted based on a scale developed by Giles et al. for another drug prevention intervention with good psychometric properties that will include 4 items. The investigators will evaluate key intervention skills: assertive communication, refusal skills, and decision making. These dimensions are identified in the curriculum summative evaluation materials identified by the MMH curriculum and assessed in previous MMH studies and based on National Health Education Standards. The current study will assess secondary behavioral outcomes including poly-drug use using an item from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH). Substance use consequences (e.g., missed school due to substance use) will be ascertained using items from the Problem Oriented Screening Instrument for Teenagers.
Dose Delivered
The investigators will assess dose or amount of program delivered using a curriculum fidelity tracking from. Teachers will be asked to complete a brief form following each lesson/unit included in the study. These units/lessons include the alcohol, tobacco and other drug prevention unit, the skills unit, and the social and emotional learning unit. The investigators will assess dose delivered by calculating the total number of lessons completed within each unit (10 lessons/unit). As part of the tracking form, teachers will report any adaptations or modifications, guided by the framework proposed by Wiltsey-Stirman et.al. This includes adding, removing and changing content, substituting activities and changing activity formats.

Full Information

First Posted
January 23, 2021
Last Updated
July 28, 2022
Sponsor
Wayne State University
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT04752189
Brief Title
Preventing Substance Use Among Youth
Official Title
Preventing Substance Use Among Youth: Behavioral and Economic Impact of Enhanced Implementation Strategies for Communities
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
July 2022
Overall Recruitment Status
Completed
Study Start Date
August 4, 2021 (Actual)
Primary Completion Date
July 14, 2022 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
July 14, 2022 (Actual)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Principal Investigator
Name of the Sponsor
Wayne State University

4. Oversight

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
No
Data Monitoring Committee
Yes

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
Using a 2-group, mixed method group randomized trial design, this study will compare standard implementation versus Enhanced Replicating Effective Programs (Enhanced REP) to deliver Michigan Model for Health (MMH) in Michigan high schools.
Detailed Description
Background: Drug use remains a major public health problem among youth in the United States. Effective implementation of evidence-based interventions for youth is critical for reducing the burden of drug use and its consequences. The Michigan Model for Health (MMH) is an intervention that has demonstrated efficacy in reducing adolescent substance use. Yet, youth rarely receive evidence-based interventions (EBIs) as intended; this is, in part, due to a poor fit between the intervention and the context. The disconnect between the EBI and context is especially pronounced among underserved and vulnerable populations, including among youth exposed to trauma. Trauma is a potent risk factor for substance use, abuse, and the development of substance use disorders. Consequently, there is a critical need to design and test effective, cost-efficient implementation strategies to optimize the fidelity of school-based drug use prevention to better meet the needs of youth exposed to trauma. The objective of this study is to design and test a multi-component implementation strategy to improve intervention-context fit and enhance fidelity and effectiveness. Methods: Using a 2-group, mixed method, randomized trial design, this study will compare standard implementation (Replicating Effective Programs [REP]) versus enhanced Enhanced Replicating Effective Programs (Enhanced REP) to deliver MMH. REP is a previously established implementation strategy that promotes EBI fidelity through a combination of curriculum packaging, training, and as-needed technical assistance. Enhanced REP incorporates tailoring of the EBI package and training and deploys customized implementation support (i.e., implementation facilitation). This research designs and tests an implementation strategy deployed to systematically enhance the fit between the intervention and the context for a universal drug use prevention curriculum. The proposed research will focus on youth at heightened risk of drug use and its consequences due to trauma exposure. The proposed research is significant because of its potential to have a positive public health impact by preventing and reducing youth drug use and its consequences.

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Substance Abuse

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Prevention
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Masking
None (Open Label)
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
6 (Actual)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
Standard MMH Curriculum Implementation
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
Teachers will receive the MMH curriculum manual, standard training and as-needed technical assistance, provided to them by the health coordinators
Arm Title
Michigan Model for Health: Learning to Enhance and Adapt for Prevention (MI-LEAP)
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
We will deploy Enhanced REP to include additional tailoring of the MMH curriculum to include trauma-informed approaches, tailored trauma-focused curriculum training, and implementation facilitation, ongoing specialized implementation support.
Intervention Type
Behavioral
Intervention Name(s)
Enhanced Replicating Effective Programs (Enhanced REP)
Intervention Description
Deploy Enhanced REP to optimize the delivery of a drug use prevention intervention in community schools and test its feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness; Enhanced REP includes tailoring the curriculum, training, and providing ongoing provider consultation, or facilitation, to support implementation.
Intervention Type
Behavioral
Intervention Name(s)
Standard implementation
Other Intervention Name(s)
Standard REP
Intervention Description
Standard implementation of the Michigan Model for Health is akin to Standard REP and includes the curriculum materials, standard training and as-needed technical assistance.
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Curriculum Feasibility
Description
To evaluate comprehensively curriculum feasibility, the investigators adopt a convergent mixed methods design. The purpose of a convergent design is to obtain complementary, though different, data on the same topic. Weiner et al.'s measures will be used to assess feasibility. Each construct has 4 items (e.g., REP is appealing, REP seems suitable), from 1: Strongly disagree to 5: Strongly agree. The investigators will use the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) interview guide to guide the qualitative investigation of using Enhanced REP for MMH. The interview guide will be designed to elicit specific feedback on Enhanced REP components (manual, training, and facilitation) and their feasibility to deliver MMH.
Time Frame
9 months
Title
Curriculum Acceptability
Description
To evaluate comprehensively curriculum acceptability, the researchers adopt a convergent mixed methods design. The purpose of a convergent design is to obtain complementary, though different, data on the same topic. Weiner et al.'s measures will be used to assess acceptability. Each construct has 4 items (e.g., REP is appealing, REP seems suitable), from 1: Strongly disagree to 5: Strongly agree. The investigators will use the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) interview guide to guide the qualitative investigation of using Enhanced REP for MMH. The interview guide will be designed to elicit specific feedback on Enhanced REP components (manual, training, and facilitation) and their acceptability to deliver MMH.
Time Frame
9 months
Title
Curriculum Appropriateness
Description
To evaluate comprehensively appropriateness the investigators adopt a convergent mixed methods design. The purpose of a convergent design is to obtain complementary, though different, data on the same topic. Weiner et al.'s measures will be used to assess appropriateness. Each construct has 4 items (e.g., REP is appealing, REP seems suitable), from 1: Strongly disagree to 5: Strongly agree. The investigators will use the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) interview guide to guide the qualitative investigation of using Enhanced REP for MMH. The interview guide will be designed to elicit specific feedback on Enhanced REP components (manual, training, and facilitation) and their appropriateness to deliver MMH.
Time Frame
9 months
Title
Cost-Effectiveness
Description
Implementation cost measures are guided by Costs of Implementing New Strategies (COINS) and include implementation strategy costs across phases of implementation relevant for replication. The investigators will measure implementation costs using a micro-costing approach to assess labor and non-labor costs. The investigators will also use available cost data from the school district as needed, summary data from previous empirical studies on implementation costs, and routinely available cost data using market prices. Net costs (net increase in costs from the Enhanced REP condition versus standard implementation) and net effectiveness (net decrease in substance use from the Enhanced REP condition versus standard implementation) will be used to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.
Time Frame
9 months
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Substance Use
Description
The investigators will assess past substance use using items from Monitoring the Future (MTF) with adapted response options and timeframe.
Time Frame
9 months
Title
Student Engagement
Description
The investigators will assess student engagement using student satisfaction and key intervention skills. The satisfaction measure will be adapted based on a scale developed by Giles et al. for another drug prevention intervention with good psychometric properties that will include 4 items. The investigators will evaluate key intervention skills: assertive communication, refusal skills, and decision making. These dimensions are identified in the curriculum summative evaluation materials identified by the MMH curriculum and assessed in previous MMH studies and based on National Health Education Standards. The current study will assess secondary behavioral outcomes including poly-drug use using an item from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH). Substance use consequences (e.g., missed school due to substance use) will be ascertained using items from the Problem Oriented Screening Instrument for Teenagers.
Time Frame
9 months
Title
Dose Delivered
Description
The investigators will assess dose or amount of program delivered using a curriculum fidelity tracking from. Teachers will be asked to complete a brief form following each lesson/unit included in the study. These units/lessons include the alcohol, tobacco and other drug prevention unit, the skills unit, and the social and emotional learning unit. The investigators will assess dose delivered by calculating the total number of lessons completed within each unit (10 lessons/unit). As part of the tracking form, teachers will report any adaptations or modifications, guided by the framework proposed by Wiltsey-Stirman et.al. This includes adding, removing and changing content, substituting activities and changing activity formats.
Time Frame
9 months

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
14 Years
Maximum Age & Unit of Time
99 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: Schools which fail to meet state standards for implementation (less than 80% of curriculum) and/or face one or more barriers to MMH implementation Exclusion Criteria: None
Facility Information:
Facility Name
Wayne State University
City
Detroit
State/Province
Michigan
ZIP/Postal Code
48202
Country
United States

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Plan to Share IPD
Yes
IPD Sharing Plan Description
From NIH HEAL (Helping to End Addiction Long-term) Public Access and Data Sharing (https://heal.nih.gov/about/public-access-data) information: Electronic copies of publications will be deposited within 4 weeks of acceptance by a journal in PubMed Central with proper metadata to be discoverable and accessible upon publication. Publications will be published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Generic License (CC BY 4.0) or otherwise dedicated to the public domain. Publications will be made publicly available immediately without an embargo period. Underlying Primary Data for the Publications will be made available through an suitable data repository, such as the NIH HEAL central data repository. To meet program goals, NIH requires broad sharing of Underlying Primary Data from NIH-Supported NIH HEAL Initiative Research Projects in a way that is responsive to concerns about protecting confidential and proprietary data and is consistent with other applicable laws and regulations.
IPD Sharing Time Frame
De-identified primary participant (i.e., student) -level data will be available through an appropriate data repository, such as the NIH HEAL Initiative central data repository. The data will be available upon acceptance for publication of the main findings from the final student-level dataset. Data will be available in the NIH HEAL repository per HEAL guidelines.
IPD Sharing Access Criteria
Access criteria will be determined by the NIH HEAL guidelines. Access to individual-level data will require entering into a data-sharing agreement that includes requirements to protect participants' privacy and data confidentiality.
Citations:
PubMed Identifier
28851459
Citation
Weiner BJ, Lewis CC, Stanick C, Powell BJ, Dorsey CN, Clary AS, Boynton MH, Halko H. Psychometric assessment of three newly developed implementation outcome measures. Implement Sci. 2017 Aug 29;12(1):108. doi: 10.1186/s13012-017-0635-3.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
19664226
Citation
Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE, Kirsh SR, Alexander JA, Lowery JC. Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implement Sci. 2009 Aug 7;4:50. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-4-50.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
21592127
Citation
O'neill JM, Clark JK, Jones JA. Promoting mental health and preventing substance abuse and violence in elementary students: a randomized control study of the Michigan Model for Health. J Sch Health. 2011 Jun;81(6):320-30. doi: 10.1111/j.1746-1561.2011.00597.x.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
23758995
Citation
Stirman SW, Miller CJ, Toder K, Calloway A. Development of a framework and coding system for modifications and adaptations of evidence-based interventions. Implement Sci. 2013 Jun 10;8:65. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-8-65.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
32307625
Citation
Eisman AB, Kilbourne AM, Greene D Jr, Walton M, Cunningham R. The User-Program Interaction: How Teacher Experience Shapes the Relationship Between Intervention Packaging and Fidelity to a State-Adopted Health Curriculum. Prev Sci. 2020 Aug;21(6):820-829. doi: 10.1007/s11121-020-01120-8.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
18067681
Citation
Kilbourne AM, Neumann MS, Pincus HA, Bauer MS, Stall R. Implementing evidence-based interventions in health care: application of the replicating effective programs framework. Implement Sci. 2007 Dec 9;2:42. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-2-42.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
36088351
Citation
Eisman AB, Palinkas LA, Koffkey C, Herrenkohl TI, Abbasi U, Fridline J, Lundahl L, Kilbourne AM. Michigan Model for HealthTM Learning to Enhance and Adapt for Prevention (Mi-LEAP): protocol of a pilot randomized trial comparing Enhanced Replicating Effective Programs versus standard implementation to deliver an evidence-based drug use prevention curriculum. Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2022 Sep 10;8(1):204. doi: 10.1186/s40814-022-01145-6.
Results Reference
derived
Links:
URL
http://www.mmhleap.org
Description
This website contains the resources for the intervention group and access to the surveys which teachers use to track their lesson fidelity.

Learn more about this trial

Preventing Substance Use Among Youth

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs