Dataset Information

Efficacy of a Universal Brief Intervention for Violence Among Urban Emergency Department Youth.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Violent injury is the leading cause of death among urban youth. Emergency department (ED) visits represent an opportunity to deliver a brief intervention (BI) to reduce violence among youth seeking medical care in high-risk communities. OBJECTIVE:The objective was to determine the efficacy of a universally applied BI addressing violence behaviors among youth presenting to an urban ED. METHODS:ED youth (14 to 20 years old) seeking medical or injury-related care in a Level I ED (October 2011-March 2015) and screening positive for a home address within the intervention or comparison neighborhood of a larger youth violence project were enrolled in this quasi-experimental study. Based on home address, participants were assigned to receive either the 30-minute therapist-delivered BI (Project Sync) or a resource brochure (enhanced usual care [EUC] condition). The Project Sync BI combined motivational interviewing and cognitive skills training, including a review of participant goals, tailored feedback, decisional balance exercises, role-playing exercises, and linkage to community resources. Participants completed validated survey measures at baseline and a 2-month follow-up assessment. Main outcome measures included self-report of physical victimization, aggression, and self-efficacy to avoid fighting. Poisson and zero-inflated Poisson regression analyses analyzed the effects of the BI, compared to the EUC condition, on primary outcomes. RESULTS:A total of 409 eligible youth (82% participation) were enrolled and assigned to receive either the BI (n = 263) or the EUC condition (n = 146). Two-month follow-up was 91% (n = 373). There were no significant baseline differences between study conditions. Among the entire sample, mean (±SD) age was 17.7 (±1.9) years, 60% were female, 93% were African American, and 79% reported receipt of public assistance. Of participants, 9% presented for a violent injury, 9% reported recent firearm carriage, 20% reported recent alcohol use, and 39% reported recent marijuana use. Compared with the EUC group, participants in the therapist BI group showed self-reported reductions in frequency of violent aggression (therapist, -46.8%; EUC, -36.9%; incident rate ratio [IRR] = 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.76 to 0.99) and increased self-efficacy for avoiding fighting (therapist, +7.2%; EUC, -1.3%; IRR = 1.09; 95% CI = 1.02 to 1.15). No significant changes were noted for victimization. CONCLUSIONS:Among youth seeking ED care in a high-risk community, a brief, universally applied BI shows promise in increased self-efficacy for avoiding fighting and a decrease in the frequency of violent aggression.

SUBMITTER: Carter PM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5018914 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Efficacy of a Universal Brief Intervention for Violence Among Urban Emergency Department Youth.

Carter Patrick M PM Walton Maureen A MA Zimmerman Marc A MA Chermack Stephen T ST Roche Jessica S JS Cunningham Rebecca M RM

Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine 20160907 9

<h4>Background</h4>Violent injury is the leading cause of death among urban youth. Emergency department (ED) visits represent an opportunity to deliver a brief intervention (BI) to reduce violence among youth seeking medical care in high-risk communities.<h4>Objective</h4>The objective was to determine the efficacy of a universally applied BI addressing violence behaviors among youth presenting to an urban ED.<h4>Methods</h4>ED youth (14 to 20 years old) seeking medical or injury-related care in ...[more]

PMID: 27265097

Similar Datasets

Project description:A recent study demonstrated the efficacy of the SafERteens intervention in reducing peer violence among adolescents presenting to the emergency department (ED). The objective of this study was to determine the efficacy of this ED-based brief intervention (BI) on dating violence 1 year following the ED visit among the subsample of adolescents in the original randomized controlled trial reporting past-year dating violence.Patients (aged 14 to 18 years) at an ED were eligible for inclusion if they had past-year violence and alcohol use. Participants were randomized to one of three conditions (BI delivered by a computer [CBI], BI delivered by a therapist and a computer (T+CBI), or control) and completed follow-ups at 3, 6, and 12 months. In addition to content on alcohol misuse and peer violence, adolescents reporting dating violence received a tailored module on dating violence. The outcome of interest was frequency of moderate and severe dating violence victimization and aggression (baseline and 3, 6, and 12 months after ED visit).Among eligible adolescents, 55% (n = 397) reported dating violence and were included in these analyses. Compared to the control group (who received a resource brochure only), participants in the CBI showed reductions in moderate dating victimization at 3 months (inter-rater reliability [IRR] = 0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.51 to 0.99; p < 0.05) and 6 months (IRR = 0.56; 95% CI = 0.38 to 0.83; p < 0.01). Models examining interaction effects were significant for the CBI on moderate dating victimization at 3 months (IRR = 0.81; 95% CI = 0.67 to 0.98; p < 0.05) and 6 months (IRR = 0.81; 95% CI = 0.66 to 0.99; p < 0.05). Significant interaction effects were found for the T+CBI on moderate dating violence victimization at 6 months (IRR = 0.81; 95% CI = 0.69 to 0.96; p < 0.01) and 12 months (IRR = 0.76; 95% CI = 0.63 to 0.90; p < 0.001) and severe dating violence victimization at 3 months (IRR = 0.76; 95% CI = 0.59 to 0.96; p < 0.05).ED-based BIs tailored to address multiple risk behaviors (i.e., peer violence, alcohol use, and dating violence) show promise for reducing moderate and severe dating victimization for up to 1 year following an ED visit.

Project description:Intimate partner violence (IPV) and heavy drinking are co-occurring public health problems, but integrated brief interventions for these conditions have not been tested.To determine whether a brief motivational intervention provided at the time of an emergency department (ED) visit reduces IPV and heavy drinking.A randomized clinical trial conducted at 2 US academic urban EDs between January 2011 and December 2014 to assess the effectiveness of a motivational intervention for IPV-involved female ED patients (ages: 18-64 years; N?=?600) who exceeded sex-specific safe drinking limits. All received social service referrals; 2:2:1 to brief intervention (n?=?242), assessed control (n?=?237), or no-contact control (n?=?121).A 20- to 30-minute manual-guided motivational intervention (recorded and monitored for fidelity) delivered by master's-level therapists with a follow-up telephone booster. The assessed control group received the same number of assessments as the brief intervention group; the no-contact control group was assessed only once at 3 months.Incidents of heavy drinking and experiencing IPV measured over prespecified, 12 weekly assessments using an interactive voice response system.Of 600 participants, 80% were black women with a mean age of 32 years. Retention was 89% for 2 or more interactive voice response system calls. Seventy-eight percent of women completed the 3-month interview, 79% at 6 months, and 71% at 12 months. During the 12-week period following the brief motivational intervention, there were no significant differences between the intervention group and the assessed control group on weekly assessments for experiencing IPV (odds ratio [OR], 1.02; 95% CI, 0.98-1.06) or heavy drinking (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.96-1.03). From baseline to 12 weeks, the number of women with any IPV in the past week decreased from 57% (134 of 237) in the intervention group to 43% (83 of 194) and from 63% (145 of 231) in the assessed control group to 41% (77 of 187) (absolute difference of 8%). From baseline to 12 weeks, the number of women with past week heavy drinking decreased from 51% (120 of 236) in the intervention group to 43% (83 of 194) and from 46% (107 of 231) in the assessed control group to 41% (77 of 187) (absolute difference of 3%). At 12 months, 43% (71 of 165) of the intervention group and 47% (78 of 165) of the assessed control group reported no IPV during the previous 3 months and 19% (29 of 152) of the intervention group and 24% (37 of 153) of the control group had reduced their alcohol consumption to sex-specific National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism safe drinking levels.For women experiencing IPV and heavy drinking, the use of a brief motivational intervention in the ED compared with assessed and no-contact controls did not significantly reduce the days of heavy drinking or incidents of IPV. These findings do not support a brief motivational intervention in this setting.clinicaltrials.gov Identifer: NCT01207258.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:With this study, we examined secondary outcomes of an emergency department (ED)-based brief intervention (BI) on dating violence perpetration and victimization and depression symptoms over 3, 6, and 12 months. METHODS:ED patients (14-20 years) were screened for risk drinking. Patients who received positive screen results were randomly assigned to a computer BI (n = 277), therapist BI (n = 278), or control condition (n = 281). After the 3-month assessment, participants were randomly assigned to receive the post-ED BI or control condition. BIs were used to address alcohol consumption and consequences (eg, dating violence and depression symptoms) by using motivational interviewing. RESULTS:A total of 836 patients were enrolled in the randomized controlled trial of 4389 patients screened and 1054 who reported risky drinking. Regression models were used to examine longitudinal effects of the alcohol BI on dating violence perpetration, dating violence victimization, and depression symptoms. The therapist BI resulted in a significant reduction of dating violence perpetration up to 12 months (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.37-0.77) and depression symptoms up to 3 months (IRR = 0.85; 95% CI: 0.72-1.00) after the intervention. Computer BI resulted in a reduction of dating violence perpetration (IRR = 0.52; 95% CI: 0.35-0.76) and depression symptoms (IRR = 0.78; 95% CI: 0.66-0.94) 6 months postintervention. Post-ED BIs were associated with lower perpetration at 12 months and lower victimization at 6 and 12 months, irrespective of BI intervention randomization at baseline; however, they did not affect depression symptoms. CONCLUSIONS:A single-session ED BI revealed previously to show promise in reducing underage drinking also demonstrates promise in preventing dating violence perpetration and depression symptoms. These technology-enhanced BIs could be particularly helpful given the potential for more efficient resource usage and ease of future implementation.

Project description:There is a strong reciprocal association between two highly prevalent public health problems: intimate partner violence and heavy drinking, both of which remain major sources of morbidity and mortality. Brief interventions in the Emergency Department setting have been found to be effective in reducing alcohol-related injury but neither classic intimate partner violence nor substance abuse interventions have adequately integrated assessment and treatment for these co-occurring conditions. The overall goal of this study is to determine whether a motivational intervention delivered at the time of an Emergency Department visit will reduce heavy drinking and improve the safety of women experiencing intimate partner violence.We are completing data collection for a randomized controlled trial enrolling 600 female patients, age 18-64, presenting to one of two urban Emergency Departments, who self-disclose both problem drinking and intimate partner violence. Eligible patients are randomized to a brief manual-guided motivational intervention, and a phone booster at 10 days. The intervention, which is delivered by masters-level therapists during the Emergency Department visit, is recorded and monitored for fidelity. Primary outcomes are episodes of heavy drinking and incidents of intimate partner violence, assessed weekly by Interactive Voice Response System for 12 weeks and at 3, 6 and 12 months by interviewers blinded to group assignment. To identify the impact of assessment alone, we included a no-contact control group assessed only once at 3 months. Secondary outcomes include violence severity, changes in the Composite Abuse Scale and alcohol quantity/frequency, along with other health-related behaviors. The analysis will also explore the impact of likely mediators and moderators of the intervention.While screening and intervention for intimate partner violence is now recommended for women of child bearing age in health care settings, there is a need for rigorous evaluations of what works for whom. Upon completion, we will have high-quality evidence regarding the effectiveness of a low-intensity, brief motivational intervention, delivered by social workers in the Emergency Department setting, for decreasing episodes of heavy drinking and intimate partner violence. Ultimately, this is a model could be generalizable to other acute health care settings.ClinicalTrials.govNCT01207258.

Project description:Brief interventions have been shown to reduce alcohol use and improve outcomes in hazardous and harmful drinkers, but evidence to support their use in emergency department (ED) patients is limited. The use of research assessments in studies of brief interventions may contribute to uncertainty about their effectiveness. Therefore we seek to determine (1) if an emergency practitioner-performed Brief Negotiation Interview or a Brief Negotiation Interview with a booster reduces alcohol consumption compared with standard care; and (2) the impact of research assessments on drinking outcomes using a standard care-no-assessment group.We randomized 889 adult ED patients with hazardous and harmful drinking. A total of 740 received an emergency practitioner-performed Brief Negotiation Interview (n=297), a Brief Negotiation Interview with a 1-month follow-up telephone booster (Brief Negotiation Interview with booster) (n=295), or standard care (n=148). We also included a standard care with no assessments (n=149) group to examine the effect of assessments on drinking outcomes. Primary outcomes analyzed with mixed-models procedures included past 7-day alcohol consumption and 28-day binge episodes at 6 and 12 months, collected by interactive voice response. Secondary outcomes included negative health behaviors and consequences collected by telephone surveys.The reduction in mean number of drinks in the past 7 days from baseline to 6 and 12 months was significantly greater in the Brief Negotiation Interview with booster (from 20.4 [95% confidence interval {CI} 18.8 to 22.0] to 11.6 [95% CI 9.7 to 13.5] to 13.0 [95% CI 10.5 to 15.5]) and Brief Negotiation Interview (from 19.8 [95% CI 18.3 to 21.4] to 12.7 [95% CI 10.8 to 14.6] to 14.3 [95% CI 11.9 to 16.8]) than in standard care (from 20.9 [95% CI 18.7 to 23.2] to 14.2 [95% CI 11.2 to 17.1] to 17.6 [95% CI 14.1 to 21.2]). The reduction in 28-day binge episodes was also greater in the Brief Negotiation Interview with booster (from 7.5 [95% CI 6.8 to 8.2] to 4.4 [95% CI 3.6 to 5.2] to 4.7 [95% CI 3.9 to 5.6]) and Brief Negotiation Interview (from 7.2 [95% CI 6.5 to 7.9] to 4.8 [95% CI 4.0 to 5.6] to 5.1 [95% CI 4.2 to 5.9]) than in standard care (from 7.2 [95% CI 6.2 to 8.2] to 5.7 [95% CI 4.5 to 6.9] to 5.8 [95% CI 4.6 to 7.0]). The Brief Negotiation Interview with booster offered no significant benefit over the Brief Negotiation Interview alone. There were no differences in drinking outcomes between the standard care and standard care-no assessment groups. The reductions in rates of driving after drinking more than 3 drinks from baseline to 12 months were greater in the Brief Negotiation Interview (38% to 29%) and Brief Negotiation Interview with booster (39% to 31%) groups than in the standard care group (43% to 42%).Emergency practitioner-performed brief interventions can reduce alcohol consumption and episodes of driving after drinking in hazardous and harmful drinkers. These results support the use of brief interventions in ED settings.

Project description:Although brief interventions (BIs) have shown some success for smoking cessation and alcohol misuse, it is not known if they can be applied in the emergency department (ED) to drug use and misuse. The objectives of this investigation were to assess the 3-month efficacy of a BI to reduce drug use and misuse, increase drug treatment services utilization among adult ED patients, and identify subgroups more likely to benefit from the BI.This randomized, controlled trial enrolled 18- to 64-year-old English- or Spanish-speaking patients from two urban, academic EDs whose responses to the Alcohol, Smoking, and Substance Involvement Screening Test indicated a need for a brief or intensive intervention. Treatment participants received a tailored BI, while control participants only completed the study questionnaires. At the 3-month follow-up, each participant's past 3-month drug use and misuse and treatment utilization were compared to his or her baseline enrollment data. Regression modeling was used to identify subgroups of patients (per demographic and clinical factors) more likely to stop or reduce their drug use or misuse or engage in drug treatment by the 3-month follow-up assessment.Of the 1,030 participants, the median age was 30 years (interquartile range = 24 to 42 years), and 46% were female; 57% were white/non-Hispanic, 24.9% were black/non-Hispanic, and 15% were Hispanic. The most commonly misused drugs were marijuana, prescription opioids, cocaine/crack, and benzodiazepines. Although at follow-up the proportions of participants reporting any past 3-month drug misuse had decreased in both study arms (control 84% vs. treatment 78%), the decreases were similar between the two study arms (?-6.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -13.0% to 0.0). In addition, at follow-up there were no differences between study arms in those who were currently receiving drug treatment (?1.8; 95% CI = -3.5 to 6.8), who had received treatment during the past 3 months (?-2.0; 95% CI = -6.5 to 2.4), or who at least contacted a treatment program (? 1.7; 95% CI = -2.4 to 6.1). Those whose baseline screening indicated the need for a brief instead of a more intensive intervention, and those currently engaged in drug treatment at the 3-month follow-up, were generally more likely to stop or decrease their drug use/misuse.The BI employed in this study did not reduce drug use and misuse or increase treatment utilization more than the control condition over a 3-month period. Future research should help determine what role, if any, BIs should play in affecting drug use and misuse among ED patients.

Dataset Information

Efficacy of a Universal Brief Intervention for Violence Among Urban Emergency Department Youth.

Publications

Efficacy of a Universal Brief Intervention for Violence Among Urban Emergency Department Youth.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure