Evaluating Interventions for Intimate Partner Violence Use in Washington State

Not Applicable

Recruiting

• Conditions: Intimate Partner Violence
• Interventions: Behavioral: Strength at Home (SAH); Behavioral: Treatment as usual for IPV

• Registration Number: NCT06526247
• Lead Sponsor: Boston University

Brief Summary

Intimate partner violence (IPV), specifically physical and psychological aggression toward an intimate partner, represents a public health crisis that affects millions of Americans each year. There currently exists very little evidence from randomized controlled trials for the effectiveness of abuser intervention programs designed to prevent and end perpetration of IPV in the general population. This is troubling considering that approximately half a million men and women are court-mandated to these programs each year.

The investigators will conduct a randomized control trial (RCT) investigating the efficacy of the Strength at Home (SAH) intervention in reducing intimate partner violence (IPV). The overarching aim of this study is to test the efficacy of SAH with court-involved-partner-violent men through an RCT comparing those who receive SAH with those who receive other standard IPV interventions offered in the state of Washington (treatment as usual- TAU).

The specific aims are:

1.1: Compare the frequency of physical and psychological IPV, the primary outcomes of interest, across conditions as reported by the male participants and their intimate partners across Time 1 (baseline) and four 3-month follow ups (Times 2-5). It is expected that greater reductions in IPV frequencies will be evidenced in SAH than TAU over the course of the year.

1.2: Compare symptoms of PTSD, alexithymia, and alcohol use problems across conditions and assessment time points as reported by the male participants. It is expected that greater reductions in these symptoms will be evidenced in SAH than TAU over the course of the year.

1.3: Compare treatment satisfaction across conditions as reported by the male participants across the four 3-month follow ups (Times 2-5). It is expected that treatment satisfaction will be higher in SAH than TAU.

Detailed Description

Not available

Study Timeline

• Study First Submitted: 2024-07-25
• Study First Submitted QC: 2024-07-25
• Study First Posted: 2024-07-29
• Study Start: 2024-11-18
• Status Verified: 2024-12
• Last Update Submitted: 2024-12-05
• Last Update Posted: 2024-12-06
• Primary Completion: 2025-07
• Study Completion: 2025-07

Recruitment & Eligibility

• Status: RECRUITING
• Sex: All
• Target Recruitment: 800

Inclusion Criteria

Men:

1. Identify as a man
2. Provide consent for the research team to contact his intimate partner(s) for data collection purposes;
3. Court-referred for IPV intervention in Washington state

Women:

1. Identify as a woman
2. Were or currently are an intimate partner involved in an incident of IPV with a court-referred participant

Read More

Exclusion Criteria

1. demonstrates active psychosis that may interfere with their ability to participate in group
2. expresses prominent suicidal or homicidal ideation that requires hospitalization
3. does not possess proficiency in spoken English
4. periods of incarceration after study enrollment

Read More

Study & Design

• Study Type: INTERVENTIONAL
• Study Design: PARALLEL

Arm && Interventions

Group	Intervention	Description
Strength at Home (SAH)	Strength at Home (SAH)	Participants randomized into this arm with receive a trauma-informed intimate partner violence (IPV) intervention program.
Treatment as Usual (TAU)	Treatment as usual for IPV	Participants randomized into this arm with receive a standard IPV intervention program in the state of Washington.

Primary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
IPV assessment	Baseline, 3 months, 6 months. 9 months, 12 months	The revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2), a 20-item instrument, will be used to assess IPV. The Physical Assault (12 items) and Psychological Aggression (8 items) subscales will be administered. Each of the 20 items is scored by the frequency of occurrence of the item with 8 choices 1-7 and 0.
Psychological IPV assessment	Baseline, 3 months, 6 months. 9 months, 12 months	The 7-item Restrictive Engulfment subscale of the Multidimensional Measure of Emotional Abuse (MMEA) will be used as an additional measure of psychological IPV. Each item has 7 potential responses from 0=never to 6= more than 20 times. Scores can range from 0 to 42, with higher scores being associated with more psychological IPV.
Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) symptoms	Baseline, 3 months, 6 months. 9 months, 12 months	The 20-item PTSD Checklist for DSM 5 (PCL-5) will be used to assess PTSD symptoms. It is a self-report measure. Items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale \[0 to 4\] and summed. Scores range from 0 to 80 with higher scores associated with more PTSD symptoms. A total score of 33 or higher may indicate severe PTSD.
Alcohol use	Baseline, 3 months, 6 months. 9 months, 12 months	The 10-item Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) will be used to assess problem drinking behavior over the past six months, with higher scores reflecting greater alcohol misuse.
Alexithymia assessment	Baseline, 3 months, 6 months. 9 months, 12 months	The 20-itemToronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) will be used to assess alexithymia. The TAS-20 uses cutoff scoring, with scores of 52-60 indicating possible alexithymia, and scores above 60 indicating alexithymia.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Treatment Satisfaction	3 months, 6 months. 9 months, 12 months	Participants' satisfaction will be assessed with a 4-item measure used in a study conducted by the Treatment of Depression Collaborative Research Program.

Trial Locations

Locations (1)

BU Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine, Psychiatry; 🇺🇸 Boston, Massachusetts, United States