Relapse/Recurrence, Substance Use (Drugs, Alcohol), Burnout
Conditions
Keywords
Mindfulness Based Relapse Prevention, Peer Recovery Specialist, Peer Worker, Coping Skills, Relapse, Recovery, Recovery Capital, Occupational Stress, Mindfulness
Brief summary
Adapt and test the effectiveness of MBRP for substance use peer workers compared to a standard of care (referral to 12-step) control condition on substance use, relapse risk, and burnout among peers in a pilot hybrid type 1 trial. The goal of this clinical trial is to learn if Mindfulness-Based Relapse Prevention can reduce substance use, relapse risk, and burnout among substance use peer workers. The objectives are to: 1. Identify the causes, consequences, and risk and protective factors for relapse among peer workers; 2. Identify peers' preferences related to MBRP content, structure, and delivery; 3. Adapt the MBRP intervention for peer workers; and 4. Assess the preliminary effectiveness and implementation outcomes of the adapted MBRP intervention. Researchers will compare MBRP to referral to 12-step (standard of care) to see if MRBP works to reduce substance use, relapse risk, and burnout. Participants will asked to: * Participate in MBRP (8 weekly 2-hour virtual sessions) * Complete 4 surveys assessing well-being outcomes * Participate in 1 virtual interview about your experience
Interventions
BEHAVIORALMindfulness Based Relapse Prevention
MBRP for peer workers consists of 8 weekly 2-hour virtual sessions.
BEHAVIORALStandard of Care
Referral to 12-step programming
Sponsors
University of Texas at Austin
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
NONE
Intervention model description
Hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation pilot trial of MBRP adapted for substance use peer workers compared to a standard of care (referral to 12-step) control condition
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 100 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
1. Are \> 18 years old 2. Fluent in English 3. Be currently employed in a substance use peer support role 4. At-risk for SUD relapse as measured by a craving score of \>15 on the adapted Penn Alcohol Craving Scale
Exclusion criteria
1. Have a cognitive impairment that jeopardizes informed consent 2. Actively suicidal or psychotic
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change from baseline in biologically verified substance use at 1, 3, and 6 months as measured by Saliva Drug Assays | From enrollment to 6 months | Saliva drug assays detecting the presence or absence of commonly used substances. Results are reported as positive or negative for each substance tested, with negative results indicating a better outcome. |
| Change from baseline in self-reported substance use days at 1, 3, and 6 months as measured by the Timeline Follow-Back (TLFB) | From enrollment to 6 months | A calendar-based interview assessing daily substance use over a specified recall period. Outcomes are reported as the number of days of substance use during the assessment period, with fewer days indicating a better outcome. |
| Change from baseline in relapse warning Signs at 1, 3, and 6 months as measured by the Advance Warning of Relapse (AWARE) Questionnaire | From enrollment to 6 months | A 28-item; 7-point Likert-type scale assessing warning signs associated with relapse risk. Total scores range from 28 to 196, with higher scores indicating greater relapse risk (worse outcome). |
| Change from baseline in professional quality of life at 1, 3, and 6 months as measured by the Professional Quality of Life Scale (ProQOL) | From enrollment to 6 months | A 30-item; 5-point Likert-type scale assessing professional quality of life across three 10-item subscales: Compassion Satisfaction, Burnout, and Secondary Traumatic Stress. Each subscale score ranges from 10 to 50. Higher Compassion Satisfaction scores indicate a better outcome, whereas higher Burnout and Secondary Traumatic Stress scores indicate worse outcomes. |
| Post-intervention perceived feasibility of the intervention as measured by the Feasibility of Intervention Measure (FIM) | Immediately after the final intervention session | A 4-item; 5-point Likert-type scale assessing the perceived feasibility of an intervention. Total scores range from 4 to 20, with higher scores indicating greater perceived feasibility (better outcome). |
| Post-intervention perceived acceptability of the intervention as measured by the Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM) | Immediately after the final intervention session | A 4-item; 5-point Likert-type scale assessing the perceived acceptability of an intervention. Total scores range from 4 to 20, with higher scores indicating greater perceived acceptability (better outcome). |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change from baseline in the coping score assessed by the Brief-COPE measure at 6 months | From enrollment to 6 months | A 28-item; 4-point Likert-type scale assessing coping strategies. The Brief COPE consists of 14 two-item subscales, each ranging from 2 to 8, with higher scores indicating greater use of that specific coping strategy. There is no overall total score. |
| Change from baseline in total score of emotion regulation assessed by the Difficulty in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS) measure at 6 months | From enrollment to 6 months | A 36-item; 5-point Likert-type scale assessing difficulties with emotion regulation. Total scores range from 36 to 180, with higher scores indicating greater difficulties in emotion regulation (worse outcome). |
| Change from baseline in total score of perceived stress assessed by the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10) measure at 6 months | From enrollment to 6 months | A 10-item; 5-point Likert-type scale assessing perceived stress. Total scores range from 0 to 40, with higher scores indicating greater perceived stress (worse outcome). |
| Change from baseline in total score of trait mindfulness assessed by the Five Factor Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ-15) measure at 6 months | From enrollment to 6 months | A 15-item; 5-point Likert-type scale assessing trait mindfulness. Total scores range from 15 to 75, with higher scores indicating greater mindfulness (better outcome). |
| Change from baseline in total score of acceptance assessed by the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-II (AAQ-II) measure at 6 months | From enrollment to 6 months | A 7-item; 7-point Likert-type scale assessing psychological inflexibility/experiential avoidance. Total scores range from 7 to 49, with higher scores indicating greater psychological inflexibility and experiential avoidance (worse outcome). |
Countries
United States
Contacts
CONTACTKatie A McCormick, PhD, MSW
Outcome results
None listed