reactieve agressieregulatie problematiek aggression self-efficacy treatment readiness
Conditions
Interventions
This study investigates the existing internet-based intervention Aggression,
which was introduced in forensic mental healthcare over ten years ago. However,
as is the case with other internet-based
Sponsors
Dimence (Deventer)
Eligibility
Age
18 Years to 64 Years
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: In order to be eligible to participate in this study, a subject must meet all of the following criteria: 1) The patient is 18 years or older 2) The patient is treated at an outpatient clinic 3) The patient receives one-on-one treatment 4) During the intake, improvement of aggression regulation has been selected as one of the treatment objectives 5) The patient indicates that they are able to read and write simple texts 6) The therapist responsible for treatment of the patient indicates that participating will not result in any harm for the patient 7) The patient voluntarily consents to participation
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: A potential subject who meets any of the following criteria will be excluded from participation in this study: 1) The patient has a current psychosis 2) The patient resides in any type of psychiatric inpatient clinic - this can be a forensic, but also another type of clinic 3) The patient is analphabetic, i.e. being unable to read and write 4) The responsible therapists identifies any other valid reason for exclusion
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| The primary outcome measure of this study is regulatory emotional self-efficacy. This construct is measured by means of the validated, 12-item Regulatory Emotional Self-efficacy (RESE) scale. The RESE scale assesses self-efficacy in managing negative emotions (8 items) and in expressing positive emotions (4 items). Negative emotional self-efficacy refers to the perceived *capability to ameliorate negative emotional states once they are aroused in response to adversity or frustrating events and to avoid being overcome by emotions such as anger, irritation, despondency, and discouragement*. Positive self-efficacy is defined as the perceived capability *to experience and to allow oneself to express positive emotions such as joy, enthusiasm and pride in response to success or pleasant events*. Earlier research has demonstrated the validity and reliability of the RESE scale. Because the RESE scale consists of only 12 items, it is easy to administer and does not require much effort of participants. | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| The secondary outcomes are treatment readiness, aggression, risk assessment and engagement. Treatment readiness and aggression are measured by the validated Dutch version of the Corrections Victoria Treatment Readiness Questionnaire (20-items) and the much-used and validated Aggression Questionnaire (12 items). In treatment of all forensic psychiatric patients, risk assessment has to be conducted by means of evidence-based risk assessment instruments. In forensic psychiatric outpatient care, the Dutch standard is the Forensisch Ambulante Risico Evaluatie (FARE), version 2. The FARE is not only used to estimate the risk on recidivism, but also to monitor changes in dynamic risk factors and risk of recidivism during treatment. Research into inter-reliability and convergent validity has shown promising results. The FARE is part of Dutch guidelines on risk assessment of forensic psychiatric outpatients. According to these guidelines, the FARE is administered twice a year, i.e. once each six months. In the FARE, 6 static and 11 dynamic risk factors are assessed. Static risk factors refer to *unchangeable* characteristics, such as age of the first offense. While they predict the risk of recidivism, they are not changeable by means of targeted interventions. Dynamic risk factors however are more related to the individual behaviour of the person and their social and living situation. Because these 11 factors are influenceable by interventions, they will be included in the analyses of this study. Finally, engagement is measured with the TWente Engagement with Ehealth and Technologies Scale (TWEETS). The scale employs a definition of engagement that incorporates behaviour, cognition, and affect, and has been shown to have a good validity and reliability. The TWEETS contains only 9 items - with three items per component of engagement - and has three slightly different versions: one for expected engagement, to be used when someone starts using an inte | — |
Countries
Netherlands
Outcome results
None listed