Safer use of antipsychotics in youth (SUAY) pragmatic trial protocol.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Programs such as the Pediatric Access Line in Washington state have shown decreases in antipsychotic medication use by youth with non-psychotic disorders. Program outcomes have been studied with observational designs. This manuscript describes the protocol for Targeted and Safer Use of Antipsychotics in Youth (SUAY), a randomized controlled trial of psychiatrist review of prescriptions and facilitated access to psychosocial care. The aim of the intervention is to reduce the number of person-days of antipsychotic use among participants.Methods
Recruitment occurs at 4 health systems. Targeted enrollment is 800 youth aged 3-17 years. Clinicians are block randomized to intervention versus usual care prior to the study. Youth are nested within the arm of the prescribing clinician. Clinicians in the intervention group receive an EHR-based best practice alert with options to expedite access to psychosocial care and all medication orders are reviewed by a child and adolescent psychiatrist with feedback provided to the prescriber. The primary outcome is person-days of antipsychotic medication use in the 6 months following the initial order. All randomized individuals contribute data regardless of their level of participation (including declining all services).Discussion
The trial has been approved by the institutional review boards at each of the 4 sites. The intervention has 4 novel design features including automated recruitment using a best practice alert, psychiatrist medication order review and consultation, telephone navigation to psychosocial care, and telemental health visits. Recruitment began in March of 2018 and will be completed in June 2020. Follow-up will be completed December 31, 2020.Trial registration
Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03448575.
SUBMITTER: Penfold RB
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7726008 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveTo develop a new approach to prescribing guidelines as part of a pragmatic trial, Safer Use of Antipsychotics in Youth (SUAY; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03448575), which supports prescribers in delivering high-quality mental health care to youths.MethodA nominal group technique was used to identify first- to nth-line treatments for target symptoms and potential diagnoses. The panel included US pediatricians, child and adolescent psychiatrists, and psychopharmacology experts. Meeting materials included information about Medicaid review programs, systematic reviews, prescribing guidelines, and a description of the pragmatic trial. Afterward, a series of 4 webinar discussions were held to achieve consensus on recommendations.ResultsThe panel unanimously agreed that the guideline should focus on target symptoms rather than diagnoses. Guidance included recommendations for first- to nth-line treatment of target mental health symptoms, environmental factors to be addressed, possible underlying diagnoses that should first be considered and ruled out, and general considerations for pharmacological and therapeutic treatments.ConclusionPrescribing guidelines are often ignored because they do not incorporate the real-world availability of first-line psychosocial treatments, comorbid conditions, and clinical complexity. Our approach addresses some of these concerns. If the approach proves successful in our ongoing pragmatic trial, Safer Use of Antipsychotics in Youth (SUAY), it may serve as a model to state Medicaid programs and health systems to support clinicians in delivering high-quality mental health care to youths.Clinical trial registration informationSafer Use of Antipsychotics in Youth; http://clinicaltrials.gov/; NCT03448575.
| S-EPMC8566327 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe World Health Organization recommends HIV self-testing (HIVST) as an additional approach to HIV testing and the Nigerian government is supportive of this policy recommendation. However, effectively increasing uptake and sustainability among Nigerian youth is unknown. The goal of this study is to conduct a full-powered type I hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial to test the effectiveness of youth-friendly implementation science strategies in increasing uptake and sustainability of HIVST led by and for Nigerian youth.MethodsOur 4 Youth by Youth (4YBY) strategy combines four core elements: 1) HIVST bundle consisting of HIVST kits and photo verification system; 2) a participatory learning community; 3) peer to peer support and technical assistance; and 4) on-site supervision and performance feedback to improve uptake and sustainability of HIVST and enhance linkage to youth-friendly health clinics for confirmatory HIV testing where needed, sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing (i.e. syphilis, gonorrhea, chlamydia, and hepatitis, STI treatment, and PrEP referral. Utilizing a stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized controlled trial, a national cohort of youth aged 14-24 recruited from 32 local government areas across 14 states and four geo-political zones in Nigeria will receive the 4YBY implementation strategy. In addition, an economic evaluation will explore the incremental cost per quality adjusted life year gained.DiscussionThis study will add to the limited "how-to-do it literature" on implementation science strategies in a resource-limited setting targeting youth population traditionally underrepresented in implementation science literature. Study findings will also optimize uptake and sustainability of HIVST led by and for young people themselves.Trial registrationThis study is registered in ClinicalTrials.govNCT04710784 (on January 15, 2021).
| S-EPMC9358609 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objectives: To assess the use of three commonly prescribed psychotropic medications in youth placed in residential care (RC). Methods: Participants were youth aged 0-20 years placed in RC institutions at least once during 2016. Data on filled prescriptions were taken from the Norwegian Prescription Database to compare the use of antidepressants, antipsychotics, and stimulants in RC with the age- and gender-adjusted general child population (GenPop) and how this co-varied with reasons for RC placement, age, and gender. Results: One thousand eight hundred fifty-six children and adolescents were identified in RC, with mean age 14 (range 0-20 years), 46% girls, 81% ≥ 13 years. Among those, 423 or 23% used any of the 3 psychotropics, which was significantly more than the 3.7% in GenPop. The prevalence ratios RC/GenPop were 6.6 for antidepressants, 17.9 for antipsychotics, and 4.4 for stimulants. The median number of days per year for the dispensed defined daily doses varied from 8.3 to 244.0 for the different antipsychotics, indicating short time use for most of the people. Polypharmacy was not frequent in RC, as only 26% used ≥2 classes of medication, but still significantly more frequent than the 10% in GenPop. Youth placed in RC for serious behavior problems had significantly higher use of stimulants than those with other placement reasons. Psychotropics were not used below age 6 years, and although the use of antidepressants and antipsychotics overall increased with age, stimulants were mostly used by 6-16-year olds. The girl/boy ratio for any psychotropic medication use in RC was 1.4 (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.1-1.6), significantly higher than the corresponding ratio in GenPop: 1.0 (95% CI: 0.9-1.0). Conclusion: The present findings do not necessarily suggest an overtreatment with medication in RC. However, the frequent short-term use of antipsychotics, presumably for non-psychotic symptoms, is a concern, as it may reflect that the youth are not provided with the recommended first-line psychological treatments.
| S-EPMC8233215 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveGuidelines recommend against prescribing antipsychotics without an indication, yet prescription rates remain undesirably high for youths. Information technology can facilitate guideline-based prescribing, but little is known about providers' needs. The Safer Use of Antipsychotics in Youth project is implementing an algorithm-based workflow for peer consultation, care navigation, and expedited psychotherapy access. To optimize workflow for a multisite trial, we engaged providers for input.MethodsGuided by human-centered design, we interviewed 15 providers from Kaiser Permanente Washington and Nationwide Children's Hospital about their prescribing barriers and workflow preferences. We identified qualitative themes on barriers affecting implementation and design opportunities to optimize workflow.ResultsProviders expressed two major barriers: potential disruptions to clinical practice and threats to professional autonomy. Three design opportunities emerged: à la carte orders, passive review of orders, and consultation self-acknowledgment.ConclusionsHuman-centered design offers an innovative approach to improve guideline-based prescribing with optimizations that are grounded in providers' needs.
| S-EPMC6773473 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMost studies investigating antipsychotic effectiveness report either total psychopathology or symptom cluster findings. Studies focusing on a separate symptom, such as hallucinations, a hallmark symptom in schizophrenia, are scarce.Therefore, the current study aims to compare the antihallucinatory effectiveness of 3 pharmacologically different antipsychotics: olanzapine, amisulpride, and aripiprazole.MethodsThe present study is part of the Bergen-Stavanger-Innsbruck-Trondheim study, a 12-month prospective, randomized, pragmatic antipsychotic drug trial in active-phase schizophrenia spectrum disorders. The primary outcome of the present study was change of hallucinations as measured by item P3 (hallucinatory behavior) from the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale in the subgroup with hallucinations at baseline. Primary analyses were intention to treat.ResultsA total of 144 participants were included in the study, where 105 (72%) had a score of 3 or more on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale P3 item at baseline, indicating the presence of hallucinations (HALL subgroup).In the HALL subgroup, a significantly less reduction of hallucinations was revealed for participants using olanzapine in weeks 12, 26, 39, and 52 when compared with amisulpride and in weeks 26 and 52 when compared with aripiprazole. In subanalyses for participants never exposed to antipsychotic drugs (antipsychotic-naive) and those who had used antipsychotics before entering the study, antihallucinatory differences were revealed only in the latter group.ConclusionsA differential antihallucinatory effect of the 3 study drugs was present. The inferior effect of olanzapine seems to be driven by the subgroup of participants exposed to antipsychotic treatment before entering the study.
| S-EPMC8244933 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Among youth, the prevalence of mental health and addiction (MHA) disorders is roughly 20%, yet youth are challenged to access evidence-based services in a timely fashion. To address MHA system gaps, this study tests the benefits of an Integrated Collaborative Care Team (ICCT) model for youth with MHA challenges. A rapid, stepped-care approach geared to need in a youth-friendly environment is expected to result in better youth MHA outcomes. Moreover, the ICCT approach is expected to decrease service wait-times, be more youth-friendly and family-friendly, and be more cost-effective, providing substantial public health benefits.In partnership with four community agencies, four adolescent psychiatry hospital departments, youth and family members with lived experience of MHA service use, and other stakeholders, we have developed an innovative model of collaborative, community-based service provision involving rapid access to needs-based MHA services. A total of 500 youth presenting for hospital-based, outpatient psychiatric service will be randomised to ICCT services or hospital-based treatment as usual, following a pragmatic randomised controlled trial design. The primary outcome variable will be the youth's functioning, assessed at intake, 6?months and 12?months. Secondary outcomes will include clinical change, youth/family satisfaction and perception of care, empowerment, engagement and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Intent-to-treat analyses will be used on repeated-measures data, along with cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses, to determine intervention effectiveness.Research Ethics Board approval has been received from the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, as well as institutional ethical approval from participating community sites. This study will be conducted according to Good Clinical Practice guidelines. Participants will provide informed consent prior to study participation and data confidentiality will be ensured. A data safety monitoring panel will monitor the study. Results will be disseminated through community and peer-reviewed academic channels.Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02836080.
| S-EPMC5293997 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere is a growing prevalence of mental health disorders among youth. Helping youth develop skills that promote and support mental well-being is an important strategy for addressing this public health concern. Building Resilience for Healthy Kids (Healthy Kids) is a school-based program designed to improve resiliency in youth aged 9-13 years old using an innovative health coaching framework.MethodsHealthy Kids is a multi-phased intervention that aims to improve youth resilience using a 6-week, 1:1 health coaching program. The program develops youth resilience and was derived from models for developing youth resilience: Positive Relationships, Coping, Skill Development, Healthy Lifestyle, Sense of Culture, and Connectedness. Effectiveness of the intervention will be evaluated using a single-group, pragmatic trial design with pretest-posttest and follow-up assessments up to 12 months. Process measures will evaluate youth's acceptance and satisfaction of the program and attendance rates. Effectiveness will be evaluated by examining changes in resilience and mental health indicators from pre-to-post program and tracking sustainment of changes in mental health indicators over time.DiscussionGiven the pragmatic nature of the study design to work with generally healthy populations of students, we expect small, but sustainable, improvements in youth resilience to be achieved through the intervention. Further, this study will provide insight into the potential effectiveness of using health coaching as a strategy to support and promote youth mental well-being in school settings.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04202913. Registered December 18, 2019.
| S-EPMC7897985 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMost people with opioid use disorder (OUD) never receive treatment. Medication treatment of OUD in primary care is recommended as an approach to increase access to care. The PRimary Care Opioid Use Disorders treatment (PROUD) trial tests whether implementation of a collaborative care model (Massachusetts Model) using a nurse care manager (NCM) to support medication treatment of OUD in primary care increases OUD treatment and improves outcomes. Specifically, it tests whether implementation of collaborative care, compared to usual primary care, increases the number of days of medication for OUD (implementation objective) and reduces acute health care utilization (effectiveness objective). The protocol for the PROUD trial is presented here.MethodsPROUD is a hybrid type III cluster-randomized implementation trial in six health care systems. The intervention consists of three implementation strategies: salary for a full-time NCM, training and technical assistance for the NCM, and requiring that three primary care providers have DEA waivers to prescribe buprenorphine. Within each health system, two primary care clinics are randomized: one to the intervention and one to Usual Primary Care. The sample includes all patients age 16-90 who visited the randomized primary care clinics from 3 years before to 2 years after randomization (anticipated to be > 170,000). Quantitative data are derived from existing health system administrative data, electronic medical records, and/or health insurance claims ("electronic health records," [EHRs]). Anonymous staff surveys, stakeholder debriefs, and observations from site visits, trainings and technical assistance provide qualitative data to assess barriers and facilitators to implementation. The outcome for the implementation objective (primary outcome) is a clinic-level measure of the number of patient days of medication treatment of OUD over the 2 years post-randomization. The patient-level outcome for the effectiveness objective (secondary outcome) is days of acute care utilization [e.g. urgent care, emergency department (ED) and/or hospitalizations] over 2 years post-randomization among patients with documented OUD prior to randomization.DiscussionThe PROUD trial provides information for clinical leaders and policy makers regarding potential benefits for patients and health systems of a collaborative care model for management of OUD in primary care, tested in real-world diverse primary care settings. Trial registration # NCT03407638 (February 28, 2018); CTN-0074 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03407638?term=CTN-0074&draw=2&rank=1.
| S-EPMC7849121 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Transition to adult care is a challenging and complex process for youth with special healthcare needs. We aim to compare effectiveness of a patient navigator service in reducing emergency room (ER) use among adolescents with chronic health conditions transitioning to adult care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:Pragmatic randomised controlled trial parallel group design comparing ER visit rates between patients with access to a personalised navigator intervention compared with usual care. Unit of randomisation is the patient. Treatment assignment will not be blinded. Embedded qualitative study to understand navigator's role and cost analysis attributable to the intervention will be performed. Patients aged 16-21 years, followed within a chronic disease clinic, expected to be transferred to adult care within 12 months and residing in Alberta during study period will be recruited from three tertiary care paediatric hospitals. Sample size will be 300 in each arm. Navigator intervention over 24 months is designed to assist participants in four domains: transition preparation, health system brokering, socioeconomic determinants of health and self-management. Primary outcome is ER visit rate during observation period. Secondary outcomes are ambulatory and inpatient care utilisation measures, as well as Transition Readiness Assessment Questionnaire score, and Short-Form Health Survey 12 (SF-12) score at 6 and 18 months post-randomisation. Poisson regression will compare rates of ER/urgent care visits between navigator and control participants, using intention to treat principle. Cost analysis of the intervention will be conducted. Thematic analysis will be used to identify perceptions of stakeholders regarding the role of navigators. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:Ethics approval was obtained from the University of Calgary Conjoint Health Research Ethics Board (REB #162561) and the University of Alberta Health Research Ethics Board (Pro00077325). Our team is composed of diverse stakeholders who are committed to improving transition of care who will assist with dissemination of results. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT03342495.
| S-EPMC6924868 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCycling has positive effects on health and the proportion of older cyclists is rising. However, the risk for older adults to be injured or killed by a bicycle accident increases. The aim of the ongoing project "Safer Cycling in Older Age (SiFAr)" is to promote safer cycling in community-dwelling older adults with a structured, multi-component exercise training.MethodsSiFAr is a randomized, controlled trial with a duration of 3 months for the intervention and a 6-9 months follow-up. We address community-dwelling persons aged 65 years and older living in the area Nürnberg-Fürth-Erlangen (Germany) who are either 1) beginners with the e-bike or 2) feeling self-reported unsteadiness when cycling or 3) uptaking cycling after a longer break. Long-term, experienced cyclists without subjectively reported limitations or worries when cycling are excluded. Participants are either randomized 1:1 to an intervention group (IG; receiving multi-component exercise program related to cycling, MEPC) or an active control group (aCG; receiving health and bicycle-related presentations, HRP). The purpose of this study is to investigate if the cycling competence of the IG will improve compared to the aCG. The cycling competence as primary outcome is tested not blinded in a standardized cycle course prior and after the intervention period, which consists of variant tasks requiring motor and cognitive skills related to traffic situations in daily life. Additional assessments such as physical functioning, quality of life, fear of falling, questionnaires regarding cycling behavior are obtained. To investigate the primary objective, regression analyses with difference of errors in the cycling course as independent variable and group as dichotomous dependent variable adjusted for covariates (sex, bicycle type) will be performed. The trial design is described in the present manuscript, using the extended CONSORT checklist for reporting pragmatic trials.DiscussionSince there is a lack of cycling-related interventions for older people, SiFAr aims to evaluate a standardized intervention to enhance cycling safety. The results of the SiFAr trial could contribute to the implementation of an evaluated cycling course concept promoting mobility and independence of older adults.Trial registrationThis study was registered with clinicaltrials.gov : NCT04362514 on April 27, 2020.
| S-EPMC8507335 | biostudies-literature