The Impact of Vocational Rehabilitation for Mentally Ill Veterans
This trial is active, not recruiting.
|Treatments||standard vocational rehabilitation, supportive employment|
|Sponsor||Tuscaloosa Research & Education Advancement Corporation|
|Start date||August 2006|
|End date||June 2010|
|Trial size||100 participants|
|Trial identifier||NCT00260507, D40921|
To study the impact of supported employment (SE) compared to standard vocational rehabilitation program (VRP) for veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
|Intervention model||parallel assignment|
Using an intent to treat analysis, subjects' maintained employed rate is measured using the Employment Index.
time frame: 12 months
Using an intent-to-treat analysis, the change from baseline to endpoint in PTSD symptoms is compared between groups using the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS).
time frame: 12 months
Male or female participants from 19 years up to 60 years old.
Inclusion - Signed informed consent - Diagnosis of PTSD (based on MINI) - Male or female - Any race or ethnicity - Age 19-60 - Currently unemployed - Interested in competitive employment - Planning to remain in a 100-mile radius of participating VAMC for the 12- mo duration Exclusion - Lifetime history of severe traumatic brain injury that has resulted in severe cognitive disorder - Diagnosis of schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or bipolar I disorder - Dementia (a standard exclusion from VRP) - Immediate need of detoxification from alcohol or drugs (a standard VRP exclusion) - Pending active legal charges or expected incarceration
|Official title||The Impact of Vocational Rehabilitation on Mentally Ill Veterans|
|Principal investigator||Lori L. Davis, MD|
|Description||Hypotheses or Key Questions I. Primary Hypothesis (obtained + maintained employment): Subjects assigned to IPS will have a higher maintained employed rate for the 12-mo observation period than their standard VRP counterparts. I.a. First Component Primary Hypothesis (obtained employment): Subjects assigned to IPS will have higher rates of obtained employment for the 12-mo observation period than the VRP subjects. I.b. Second Component Primary Hypothesis (maintained employment): Among those subjects employed, those assigned to IPS will have worked more weeks for the 12-mo observation period than the VRP subjects. II. Secondary Hypothesis: Those subjects who obtain competitive employment will have significantly reduced symptoms of PTSD from baseline to endpoint compared to those subjects who do not obtain competitive employment. III. Confirmatory and Correlational Hypotheses: Compared to VRP subjects, those subjects assigned to IPS will have: - greater work intensity (# weeks, days, # hours, wages earned) - higher total earnings - greater improvement in quality of life outcomes Supplemental hypothesis (moderator): Because of the superior integration with the mental health (MH) treatment team, social work services, and community resources that the IPS-SE employment specialist provides as part of this model, we hypothesize that the IPS-SE model will have greater success in the maintenance of competitive employment compared to standard VRP for veterans with PTSD challenged in one or more of these psychosocial domains. From a research perspective, a variable that characterizes subjects for whom a particular treatment will be effective is called a moderator of treatment. The hypothesized moderators of IPS-SE and standard VRP for subjects with PTSD are: 1) Transportation, 2) Housing, 3) Financial Means, and 4) Family Care Burden. We hypothesize that these variables will have moderating effects for each of two outcomes: 1) number of weeks the participant is competitively employed during the 12-month study period and 2) their score on the Sheehan Disability Scale. Several principles are important in defining a moderator. First, the moderator must precede treatment. In our RCT, these psychosocial domains are baseline characteristics of subjects enrolled in the study. Second, the moderator must be uncorrelated with treatment choice. This will be the case in this RCT due to a 1:1 randomization, which should balance baseline characteristics between the two groups. Third, a moderator of treatment must have a differential effect of treatment for each level of the moderator. The treatment effect (e.g., active vs. comparator) must be shown to be greater for one level of the moderator (i.e. IPS-SE will show a greater effect size than standard VRP in subjects with a moderator present). Also, an index that combines these domains will be explored and formulated to identify subjects that may benefit to greater extent from IPS-SE.|
Call for more information