NCT Number: NCT02524171
The purpose of this study is to determine whether Moral Reconation Therapy (MRT) is effective for reducing risk of criminal recidivism and improving other health-related outcomes (substance use, mental health, housing, and employment problems) among justice-involved Veterans entering residential mental health treatment programs in the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).
Looking for future studies?
Notify MeAll sexes
Interventional
Not applicable
Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System Eugene J. Towbin Healthcare Center, Little Rock, AR, North Little Rock, Arkansas, United States
Approximately 146,000 Veterans are released each year from correctional settings; however, two thirds will likely reoffend and return to the justice system. Antisocial cognitions and behaviors are the strongest predictors of reoffending and are highly prevalent among justice-involved Veterans (JIVs). However, in the absence of treatments with demonstrated effectiveness with JIVs, no systematic approach to address antisocial cognitions and behaviors has been implemented in VA. Moral Reconation Therapy (MRT) is a cognitive-behavioral intervention that aims to reduce antisocial cognitions and behaviors. MRT has the best empirical support for reducing risk for criminal recidivism among civilian offenders, and its associated mechanisms (improvements in interpersonal functioning and impulse control) have been linked to improvements in health-related outcomes that are also risk factors for recidivism (substance use, mental health, housing, and employment problems). However, no trials have been conducted with JIVs. Differences between JIVs and justice-involved civilians (e.g., prevalence of traumatic brain injuries; interpersonal problems) suggests prior research on MRT with civilians may not be generalizable, and prompted the VA's Veterans Justice Programs (VJP) and the developers of MRT to develop a Veteran-specific curriculum of this intervention.
Using the new Veteran-specific manual, the overarching objective of the current proposal is to implement and evaluate MRT as an intervention to reduce risk for criminal recidivism and improve health-related outcomes among JIVs in VA Mental Health Residential Rehabilitation Treatment Programs (MH RRTPs). Using a Hybrid Type 1 design, this project will test the effectiveness of MRT in a multisite Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) (Palo Alto, Little Rock, and Bedford VAs) and conduct a formative evaluation to facilitate future implementation of MRT in VA.
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
MRT is a group-based cognitive-behavioral intervention to restructure antisocial thinking. Patients will receive two groups per week of this intervention for approximately 12 weeks, in addition to the usual care they receive in the mental health residential rehabilitation treatment program.
Other names: MRT
Time frame: 6 months (post-baseline)
The Psychological Inventory of Criminal Thinking Styles (56 items) was administered to assess criminal thinking. The measure includes scales of Mollification, Cutoff, Entitlement, Power Orientation, Super-optimism, Cognitive Indolence, and Discontinuity . Scores on these scales were summed to create a General Criminal Thinking score, which has been validated as an overall index of recidivism risk. Higher scores equate to more criminal thinking. Scores were converted to a T-score metric (M=50, SD=10), calculated in reference to norms from samples of incarcerated offenders.
Time frame: 12 months (post-baseline)
The Psychological Inventory of Criminal Thinking Styles (56 items) was administered to assess criminal thinking. The measure includes scales of Mollification, Cutoff, Entitlement, Power Orientation, Super-optimism, Cognitive Indolence, and Discontinuity . Scores on these scales were summed to create a General Criminal Thinking score, which has been validated as an overall index of recidivism risk. Higher scores equate to more criminal thinking. Scores were converted to a T-score metric (M=50, SD=10), calculated in reference to norms from samples of incarcerated offenders.
Time frame: 6 months (post-baseline)
The quantity and frequency of patients' self-reported alcohol use in the past 6 months, measured with the Timeline Follow-Back interview that was administered at the 6-month follow-up interview.
Time frame: 6 months (post-baseline)
The quantity and frequency of patients' self-reported drug use in the past 6 months, measured with the Timeline Follow-Back interview. It was administered at each time point to calculate for the past 6 months total number of days using any drugs (marijuana, cocaine, amphetamines, heroin, other opiates, benzodiazepines, barbiturates, inhalants, or hallucinogens).
Time frame: 6 months (post-baseline)
Scale A of the Measures of Criminal Attitudes and Associates (MCAA; Mills, Kroner, & Forth, 2002) was administered at each interview to quantify participants' associations with criminal peers, a strong predictor of criminal recidivism (Mills, Kroner, & Hemmati, 2004). Participants were asked to consider the four adults (excluding family, co-workers, or other residents in treatment) with whom they spend the most free-time. A count variable was created by summing the number of friends for which the participant answered yes to any of the questions of criminal involvement (possible range=0-4, where a higher score indicates a worse outcome)
Time frame: 6 months (post-baseline)
The Employment module of the ASI was administered at each timepoint to assess problem severity in this domain, using composite score indices (range 0 to 1); higher scores indicate greater problem severity.
Time frame: 6 months (post-baseline)
The Alcohol module of the ASI was administered at each time point to assess problem severity in this domain, using composite score indices (ranging from 0 to 1); higher scores indicate greater problem severity. ASI composite scores such as this have long been used to provide internally-consistent evaluations of a patient in a particular problem area (Grahn & Padyab, 2020).
Time frame: 6 months (post-baseline)
The Legal Status module of the Addiction Severity Index (ASI; McLellan et al., 2006) was administered at each interview to assess legal problem severity. The latter is based on a composite index derived from five items: Are you presently awaiting charges, trial, or sentence? How many days in the past 30 have you engaged in illegal activities for profit? How serious do you feel your present legal problems are? (0=Not at all, 4=Extremely) How important to you now is counseling or referral for these legal problems? (0=Not at all, 4=Extremely) How much money did you receive from illegal sources in the past 30 days? These items were standardized and aggregated and yield scores ranging from 0 to 1; higher scores indicate greater problem severity of legal problems.
Time frame: 6 months (post-baseline)
The Family/Social module of the ASI was administered at each timepoint to assess problem severity in this domain, using composite score indices (range 0 to 1); higher scores indicate greater problem severity.
Time frame: 12 months (post-baseline)
The quantity and frequency of patients' self-reported alcohol use in the past 6 months, measured with the Timeline Follow-Back interview that was administered at the 12-month follow-up interview.
Time frame: 12 months (post-baseline)
The quantity and frequency of patients' self-reported drug use in the past 6 months, measured with the Timeline Follow-Back interview. It was administered at each time point to calculate for the past 6 months total number of days using any drugs (marijuana, cocaine, amphetamines, heroin, other opiates, benzodiazepines, barbiturates, inhalants, or hallucinogens).
Time frame: 12 months (post-baseline)
Scale A of the Measures of Criminal Attitudes and Associates (MCAA; Mills, Kroner, & Forth, 2002) was administered at each interview to quantify participants' associations with criminal peers, a strong predictor of criminal recidivism (Mills, Kroner, & Hemmati, 2004). Participants were asked to consider the four adults (excluding family, co-workers, or other residents in treatment) with whom they spend the most free-time. A count variable was created by summing the number of friends for which the participant answered yes to any of the questions of criminal involvement (possible range=0-4, where a higher score indicates a worse outcome)
Time frame: 12 months (post-baseline)
The Employment module of the ASI was administered at each timepoint to assess problem severity in this domain, using composite score indices (range 0 to 1); higher scores indicate greater problem severity.
Time frame: 12 months (post-baseline)
The Alcohol module of the ASI was administered at each time point to assess problem severity in this domain, using composite score indices (ranging from 0 to 1); higher scores indicate greater problem severity. ASI composite scores such as this have long been used to provide internally-consistent evaluations of a patient in a particular problem area (Grahn & Padyab, 2020).
Time frame: 12 months (post-baseline)
The Legal Status module of the Addiction Severity Index (ASI; McLellan et al., 2006) was administered at each interview to assess legal problem severity. The latter is based on a composite index derived from five items: Are you presently awaiting charges, trial, or sentence? How many days in the past 30 have you engaged in illegal activities for profit? How serious do you feel your present legal problems are? (0=Not at all, 4=Extremely) How important to you now is counseling or referral for these legal problems? (0=Not at all, 4=Extremely) How much money did you receive from illegal sources in the past 30 days? These items were standardized and aggregated and yield scores ranging from 0 to 1; higher scores indicate greater problem severity of legal problems.
Time frame: 12 months (post-baseline)
The Family/Social module of the ASI was administered at each timepoint to assess problem severity in this domain, using composite score indices (range 0 to 1); higher scores indicate greater problem severity.
VA Office of Research and Development
Fed
Improving Treatment Engagement and Outcomes Among Justice-involved Veterans
Acronym: MRT
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT05383300
Antisocial Personality Disorder, Mental Disorders
London, Nottinghamshire, United Kingdom
View Trial DetailsNCT04903938
Aberrant Motor Behavior in Dementia, Aggression
View Trial DetailsNCT06176638
Aberrant Motor Behavior in Dementia, Aggression
Omaha, Nebraska, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT05344092
Anxiety, Anxiety Disorders
Bedford, Massachusetts, United States
View Trial Details