Effectiveness and Cost Effectiveness of Peer Mentors in Reducing Hospital Use (Project PEP)

The recruitment status of this study is unknown because the information has not been verified recently.
Verified March 2012 by Yale University.
Recruitment status was  Recruiting
Sponsor:
Collaborator:
Information provided by (Responsible Party):
Yale University
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
NCT01566513
First received: March 26, 2012
Last updated: March 28, 2012
Last verified: March 2012

March 26, 2012
March 28, 2012
August 2011
November 2013   (final data collection date for primary outcome measure)
  • Service use [ Time Frame: 3 months ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    Via self-report from the participant
  • Service Use [ Time Frame: 9 months ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    Via self-report from the participant
Same as current
Complete list of historical versions of study NCT01566513 on ClinicalTrials.gov Archive Site
  • Psychiatric symptoms [ Time Frame: 3 months ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    Measured using the Symptom Distress scale and the Paranoia and Psychoticism subscales from the Symptom Check List-90 (SCL-90)
  • Quality of life [ Time Frame: 3 month ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    Measured using Lehman's Brief Quality of Life scale
  • Community inclusion [ Time Frame: 3 months ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    Measured using Mancini's Community Connections Inventory
  • Psychiatric symptoms [ Time Frame: 9 months ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    Measured using the Symptom Distress scale and the Paranoia and Psychoticism subscales from the Symptom Check List-90 (SCL-90)
  • Quality of Life [ Time Frame: 9 months ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    Measured using Lehman's Brief Quality of Life scale
  • Community Inclusion [ Time Frame: 9 months ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    Measured using Mancini's Community Connections Inventory
Same as current
Not Provided
Not Provided
 
Effectiveness and Cost Effectiveness of Peer Mentors in Reducing Hospital Use
Effectiveness and Cost Effectiveness of Peer Mentors in Reducing Hospital Use

The current study, through a randomized controlled design, will evaluate the effectiveness of peer support, as compared to usual care and to an equivalent amount of support offered by peer case managers and non-peer recovery mentors, in reducing hospital days and readmissions and in promoting recovery and community inclusion among adults with mental illnesses with histories of multiple hospitalizations. The current study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of adding peer support to the array of services available to persons with serious mental illnesses who have histories of multiple hospitalizations and will test a theoretical model of the active ingredients of peer support, focusing specifically on the roles of 1) instillation of hope through positive self-disclosure; 2) role modeling of self-care and exploring new ways of using experiential knowledge; and 3) a trusting relationship characterized by acceptance, understanding, and empathy with conditional regard.

Not Provided
Interventional
Not Provided
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: Open Label
Primary Purpose: Treatment
Serious Mental Illness
  • Behavioral: Community Connector
    The participant randomized into this arm of the study is invited to work with a person trained as a community connector, someone who is trained in Intentional Peer Support but does not have a lived experience of mental illness.
  • Behavioral: Peer Recovery Mentor
    A participant randomized into this arm of the study is offered the chance to work with a Peer Recovery Mentor, who is trained in Intentional Peer Support.
  • Behavioral: Peer Case Manager
    A participant randomized into this arm of the study is offered the chance to work with a Peer Recovery Mentor, who is trained in Intentional Peer Support.
  • No Intervention: Treatment as usual
  • Experimental: Community Connector
    The participant randomized into this arm of the study is invited to work with a person trained as a community connector, who is trained in Intentional Peer Support but does not have a lived experience of mental illness.
    Intervention: Behavioral: Community Connector
  • Experimental: Peer Recovery Mentor
    A participant randomized into this arm of the study is offered the chance to work with a Peer Recovery Mentor, who is trained in Intentional Peer Support.
    Intervention: Behavioral: Peer Recovery Mentor
  • Experimental: Peer Case Manager
    If a participant is randomized into this condition, they are offered the chance to work with a Case Manager, who is trained in strengths-based case management.
    Intervention: Behavioral: Peer Case Manager
Not Provided

*   Includes publications given by the data provider as well as publications identified by ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier (NCT Number) in Medline.
 
Recruiting
320
Not Provided
November 2013   (final data collection date for primary outcome measure)

Inclusion Criteria:

  • 2 or more psychiatric hospitalizations in the past year
  • A diagnosis of serious mental illness

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Dementia or other organic condition limiting ability to provide informed consent
Both
18 Years and older
No
United States
 
NCT01566513
1010007542, 1R01MH091453
Yes
Yale University
Yale University
National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)
Principal Investigator: Larry Davidson, PhD Yale Program for Recovery and Community Health
Yale University
March 2012

ICMJE     Data element required by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors and the World Health Organization ICTRP