Skip to content

Illness Management and Recovery Treatment Integrity Scale Validation and Leadership Intervention Development

Illness Management and Recovery Treatment Integrity Scale Validation and Leadership Intervention Development

Status
Completed
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02431299
Acronym
IT IS VALID
Enrollment
299
Registered
2015-05-01
Start date
2012-09-30
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2015-12-23

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Severe Mental Illness

Brief summary

Illness Management and Recovery (IMR) is an evidenced-based approach to teaching consumers with severe mental illness how to set and achieve personal recovery goals and acquire the knowledge and skills to independently manage their illnesses. Longitudinal, multi-site, and randomized controlled trials have shown IMR to be effective in increasing illness self-management and coping; some evidence also points to reduced hospitalization rates. Fidelity, or adherence to a specific treatment model, is equally important to both clinical research and to the practical dissemination of evidence-based practices to the field. To this end, the research team has developed an IMR clinician-level fidelity assessment, the IMR Treatment Integrity Scale (IT-IS). However, the validity of the preliminary IT-IS has not been rigorously evaluated. Additionally, it is crucial to develop strategies to utilize the IT IS to increase adherence to the IMR model and ultimately increase consumer outcomes. The purpose of this study is to assess the construct validity of the IT-IS by testing the relationship between IT-IS elements and mechanisms of change and proximal outcomes. The investigators will collect a sample of IMR session recordings and pre-post data from IMR participants from recruitment sites in Indiana, New Jersey and several other states. The investigators will test hypothesized relationships between specific program elements and theoretically proposed mechanisms of change. The investigators will also assess organizational and clinician factors affecting IMR competence by including a survey for the staff members who are located as sites where the investigators have clinicians participating in providing IMR.

Interventions

None listed

Sponsors

Indiana University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Observational model
COHORT
Time perspective
PROSPECTIVE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

Clinicians: * 18 years or older * Providing IMR individually or in group format at a participating agency * Willing and able to provide consent * Willing to complete study measures * Willing to be audio recorded Consumers: * 18 years or older * Willing and able to provide consent * Able to complete a brief cognitive screener * Willing to complete study measures * Receiving IMR intervention at a participating agency * Willing to be audio recorded

Exclusion criteria

* Individuals younger than 18 years old

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Illness Management and Recovery Scale3-MonthsPost-intervention scores were assessed. This measure is designed to assess consumer-rated illness self management skills. This scale is based on a 15 items, each rated on a 5 point Likert scale, ranging from 1 to 5. Higher numbers of this scale represent better outcomes. A mean score of all 15 items is provided as the primary outcome score for this scale.
Illness Management and Recovery Treatment Integrity Scale3-MonthsClinician competency rating scale was used to assess clinician competence in providing IMR. This data was used to test the theory that IMR competency would impact consumers' ability to engage in illness self management practices as rated by the Illness Management and Recovery Scale. This scale is rated by trained observers, and the scale contains 16 items, rated on a 1 - 5 point scale. A 5 indicates higher competency and fidelity to the IMR treatment model. A mean score is calculated across all 16 items. Higher scores indicate higher clinician competence in providing IMR.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Adult State Hope Scale3-MonthsThis is a consumer rated measure that assesses the level of goal related hope a consumer possesses. This version is a 6 item measure, with each item rated on a 4 point scale (range 1-4, with 1 being Definitely False and 4 being Definitely True). A summary score is calculated by summing all 6 items. Higher scores represent better outcomes (i.e. higher goal related hope). These summary scores were then averages to calculate a mean score for our sample.
Brief COPE Adaptive Subscale3-MonthsThis is a consumer rated assessment of adaptive coping skills. This is derived from the 28 item, full scale. The scale uses a 1-4 Likert scale, indicating the frequency of using different coping strategies. There are 14 subscales, each calculated by summing 2 items. The range on each subscale is 2 - 8. The 14 subscales are further combined into 2 larger scales - maladaptive and adaptive coping. Adaptive coping is calculated by averaging the responses from 8 out of the 14 subscales. Higher scores indicate better outcomes (i.e. higher use of adaptive coping strategies).
Working Alliance Inventory Short Form3-MonthsThis is a consumer rated scale indicated working alliance between consumer and clinician. The scale has 12 items, rated on a 7 point Likert style scale (ranging from 1-7). The total score provided a mean score of all 12 items. Better working alliance is indicated by a higher score.
UNCOPE Measure3-MonthsThis meThis measure is a consumer rated substance abuse screener consisting of 6 yes or no questions. A response of yes is assigned a value of 1. The total number of yes responses are summed and a score of greater than 4 indicates likelihood of substance abuse. Higher scores mean worse outcomes for this scale (i.e. the higher the score, the greater the likelihood of substance abuse issues).
Brief COPE Maladaptive Subscale3-MonthsThis is a consumer rated assessment of adaptive coping skills. This is derived from the 28 item, full scale. The scale uses a 1-4 Likert scale, indicating the frequency of using different coping strategies. There are 14 subscales, each calculated by summing 2 items. The range on each subscale is 2 - 8. The 14 subscales are further combined into 2 larger scales - maladaptive and adaptive coping. Maladaptive coping is calculated by averaging the responses from 6 out of the 14 subscales. Higher scores indicate worse outcomes (i.e. higher use of maladaptive coping strategies).
Medication Adherence Rating Scale3-MonthsThis is a consumer rated scale assessing medication adherence. This is a 10 item scale with each question rated as yes or no. A yes is assigned a value of 1. The scale ranges from 0 (no yes responses) to 10 (all yes responses endorsed). The total number of yes responses is totaled to create a summary score. The mean score is calculated based on averaging the summary scores for the entire consumer sample. Higher scores mean better outcomes for medication adherence.
Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support3-MonthsThis scale is a consumer rated assessment of perceived social support systems. There are 12 items each rated on a 7 point Likert scale (ranging from 1-7). A mean score is calculated from all 12 items. Higher scores represent better outcomes (i.e. higher levels of perceived social support).

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
IMR Consumers
Consumer participants who are engaging in Illness Management and Recovery (IMR) intervention.
236
IMR Clinicians
Clinicians who provided the IMR intervention to the IMR Consumers
62
Total298

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicIMR ConsumersTotalIMR Clinicians
Adult State Hope Scale18.8 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.7
18.8 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.7
NA units on a scale
Age, Categorical
<=18 years
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Age, Categorical
>=65 years
5 Participants6 Participants1 Participants
Age, Categorical
Between 18 and 65 years
231 Participants292 Participants61 Participants
Brief COPE Inventory Adaptive Coping Subscale5.64 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.4
5.64 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.4
NA units on a scale
Brief COPE Inventory Maladaptive Coping Subscale4.46 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.2
4.46 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.2
NA units on a scale
Gender
Female
90 participants131 participants41 participants
Gender
Male
128 participants149 participants21 participants
Illness Management and Recovery Scale3.55 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.6
3.55 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.6
NA units on a scale
Medication Adherence Rating Scale2.45 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.12
2.45 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.12
NA units on a scale
Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support4.94 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.7
4.94 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.7
NA units on a scale
Region of Enrollment
United States
236 participants298 participants62 participants
UNCOPE1.88 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.13
1.88 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.13
NA units on a scale
Working Alliance Inventory Short Form5.65 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 1
5.65 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 1
NA units on a scale

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
— / —— / —
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 2360 / 63
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 2360 / 63

Outcome results

Primary

Illness Management and Recovery Scale

Post-intervention scores were assessed. This measure is designed to assess consumer-rated illness self management skills. This scale is based on a 15 items, each rated on a 5 point Likert scale, ranging from 1 to 5. Higher numbers of this scale represent better outcomes. A mean score of all 15 items is provided as the primary outcome score for this scale.

Time frame: 3-Months

Population: Every effort was made to collect post-intervention follow up data for participants. In some instances, participants were unable to provide this information (i.e. hospitalized, unable to attend data collection session, unwilling). As all outcome measures were consumer self-rated, if the consumer was unavailable data is missing for that participant.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
IMR ConsumersIllness Management and Recovery Scale3.72 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.5
p-value: <0.01t-test, 2 sided
Primary

Illness Management and Recovery Treatment Integrity Scale

Clinician competency rating scale was used to assess clinician competence in providing IMR. This data was used to test the theory that IMR competency would impact consumers' ability to engage in illness self management practices as rated by the Illness Management and Recovery Scale. This scale is rated by trained observers, and the scale contains 16 items, rated on a 1 - 5 point scale. A 5 indicates higher competency and fidelity to the IMR treatment model. A mean score is calculated across all 16 items. Higher scores indicate higher clinician competence in providing IMR.

Time frame: 3-Months

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
IMR ConsumersIllness Management and Recovery Treatment Integrity Scale2.73 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.55
Comparison: Hypothesized that higher levels of IMR competence would predict higher IMRS outcomes.p-value: <0.05Regression, Linear
Secondary

Adult State Hope Scale

This is a consumer rated measure that assesses the level of goal related hope a consumer possesses. This version is a 6 item measure, with each item rated on a 4 point scale (range 1-4, with 1 being Definitely False and 4 being Definitely True). A summary score is calculated by summing all 6 items. Higher scores represent better outcomes (i.e. higher goal related hope). These summary scores were then averages to calculate a mean score for our sample.

Time frame: 3-Months

Population: Every effort was made to collect post-intervention follow up data for participants. In some instances, participants were unable to provide this information (i.e. hospitalized, unable to attend data collection session, unwilling). As all outcome measures were consumer self-rated, if the consumer was unavailable data is missing for that participant.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
IMR ConsumersAdult State Hope Scale19.13 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.6
Secondary

Brief COPE Adaptive Subscale

This is a consumer rated assessment of adaptive coping skills. This is derived from the 28 item, full scale. The scale uses a 1-4 Likert scale, indicating the frequency of using different coping strategies. There are 14 subscales, each calculated by summing 2 items. The range on each subscale is 2 - 8. The 14 subscales are further combined into 2 larger scales - maladaptive and adaptive coping. Adaptive coping is calculated by averaging the responses from 8 out of the 14 subscales. Higher scores indicate better outcomes (i.e. higher use of adaptive coping strategies).

Time frame: 3-Months

Population: Every effort was made to collect post-intervention follow up data for participants. In some instances, participants were unable to provide this information (i.e. hospitalized, unable to attend data collection session, unwilling). As all outcome measures were consumer self-rated, if the consumer was unavailable data is missing for that participant.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
IMR ConsumersBrief COPE Adaptive Subscale5.73 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.3
Secondary

Brief COPE Maladaptive Subscale

This is a consumer rated assessment of adaptive coping skills. This is derived from the 28 item, full scale. The scale uses a 1-4 Likert scale, indicating the frequency of using different coping strategies. There are 14 subscales, each calculated by summing 2 items. The range on each subscale is 2 - 8. The 14 subscales are further combined into 2 larger scales - maladaptive and adaptive coping. Maladaptive coping is calculated by averaging the responses from 6 out of the 14 subscales. Higher scores indicate worse outcomes (i.e. higher use of maladaptive coping strategies).

Time frame: 3-Months

Population: Every effort was made to collect post-intervention follow up data for participants. In some instances, participants were unable to provide this information (i.e. hospitalized, unable to attend data collection session, unwilling). As all outcome measures were consumer self-rated, if the consumer was unavailable data is missing for that participant.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
IMR ConsumersBrief COPE Maladaptive Subscale4.47 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.1
Secondary

Medication Adherence Rating Scale

This is a consumer rated scale assessing medication adherence. This is a 10 item scale with each question rated as yes or no. A yes is assigned a value of 1. The scale ranges from 0 (no yes responses) to 10 (all yes responses endorsed). The total number of yes responses is totaled to create a summary score. The mean score is calculated based on averaging the summary scores for the entire consumer sample. Higher scores mean better outcomes for medication adherence.

Time frame: 3-Months

Population: Every effort was made to collect post-intervention follow up data for participants. In some instances, participants were unable to provide this information (i.e. hospitalized, unable to attend data collection session, unwilling). As all outcome measures were consumer self-rated, if the consumer was unavailable data is missing for that participant.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
IMR ConsumersMedication Adherence Rating Scale2.45 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.15
Secondary

Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support

This scale is a consumer rated assessment of perceived social support systems. There are 12 items each rated on a 7 point Likert scale (ranging from 1-7). A mean score is calculated from all 12 items. Higher scores represent better outcomes (i.e. higher levels of perceived social support).

Time frame: 3-Months

Population: Every effort was made to collect post-intervention follow up data for participants. In some instances, participants were unable to provide this information (i.e. hospitalized, unable to attend data collection session, unwilling). As all outcome measures were consumer self-rated, if the consumer was unavailable data is missing for that participant.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
IMR ConsumersMultidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support5.18 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.11
Secondary

UNCOPE Measure

This meThis measure is a consumer rated substance abuse screener consisting of 6 yes or no questions. A response of yes is assigned a value of 1. The total number of yes responses are summed and a score of greater than 4 indicates likelihood of substance abuse. Higher scores mean worse outcomes for this scale (i.e. the higher the score, the greater the likelihood of substance abuse issues).

Time frame: 3-Months

Population: Every effort was made to collect post-intervention follow up data for participants. In some instances, participants were unable to provide this information (i.e. hospitalized, unable to attend data collection session, unwilling). As all outcome measures were consumer self-rated, if the consumer was unavailable data is missing for that participant.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
IMR ConsumersUNCOPE Measure.30 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.03
Secondary

Working Alliance Inventory Short Form

This is a consumer rated scale indicated working alliance between consumer and clinician. The scale has 12 items, rated on a 7 point Likert style scale (ranging from 1-7). The total score provided a mean score of all 12 items. Better working alliance is indicated by a higher score.

Time frame: 3-Months

Population: Every effort was made to collect post-intervention follow up data for participants. In some instances, participants were unable to provide this information (i.e. hospitalized, unable to attend data collection session, unwilling). As all outcome measures were consumer self-rated, if the consumer was unavailable data is missing for that participant.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
IMR ConsumersWorking Alliance Inventory Short Form5.58 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026