RISE With Veteran Service Providers

NCT05490004 | Completed

• 1 other identifier: HiREB # 14243
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 40
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

Veterans and their families are more likely to experience forms of family violence like intimate-partner violence and child maltreatment. Evidence suggests that healthcare and social service providers (HSSPs) need more training to effectively and confidently recognize and respond to these situations. The Violence, Evidence, Guidance, Action (VEGA) Educational Intervention is a novel education intervention aimed at improving provider's preparation for these clinical encounters. The goal of this project is to determine the acceptability and feasibility of a future randomized-controlled trial comparing two approaches (facilitator-led VEGA or self-directed VEGA) to administering the VEGA training to understand whether/how these approaches can support HSSPs continued care of veterans and their families. The investigators aim to generate initial estimates of the effectiveness of both approaches in improving HSSPs knowledge and skills to effectively recognize and respond to intimate-partner violence and related forms of family violence, including child maltreatment. As well, the investigators aim to contribute to the knowledge base regarding optimal educational approaches for HSSP education in family violence. The investigators hypothesize that there will be significant increases in preparedness, knowledge and skills, and self-efficacy to recognize and respond to both CM and IPV in both the experimental and AC arms from Time 1 (baseline) to Time 2 (immediately after the intervention) and Time 1 (baseline) to Time 3 (3 month follow-up). These improvements will be slightly attenuated in the experimental arm. Qualitative data pertaining to perceived value and impact will corroborate the quantitative findings.

Conditions

Domestic Violence; Veterans Family; Veterans; Child Maltreatment

Keywords

Family Violence; Medical Education; Education Scholarship; Health Professions Education; Mandatory Reporting; Child Maltreatment; Intimate Partner Violence; Veterans; Veterans Family

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (4)

• Number of Providers Who Meet Eligibility Criteria

  The RC will track the number of providers who meet eligibility criteria, our aims are that we will recruit a total of 80 participants within 16 weeks, an average of 5 providers per week.

  Through study completion, an average of 4 months

• Number of Providers who Consent

  The RC will track the number of providers who consent to the study and agree to be randomized to either self-directed or facilitator-led VEGA education approaches, both overall and per week of recruitment. Our aim is that the proportion of providers who contact the research team about participation and who consent to randomization will be 70% or greater.

  Through study completion, an average of 4 months

• Number of Providers who Complete Assigned Intervention

  The RC will track the proportion of providers who are randomized and complete each arm, with completion consisting of reviewing all module content and the animated simulations in the case of self-directed VEGA and full attendance of the virtual workshop in the case of facilitator-led VEGA. Our goal is that the proportion of providers who are randomized and complete the assigned intervention will be 70% or greater for each arm. The acceptability of the facilitator-led and self-directed educational approaches as well as their value and impact will be determined via the coding of qualitative interview data from a sub-sample of participants.

  Through study completion, an average of 4 months

• Number of Providers who Complete Assessments

  The RC will track the feasibility of collecting trial outcome data (survey assessments) at Time 1, Time 2, and Time 3. Our goal is that the proportion of missing data for each time point will be less than 20%. Qualitative description will be used to expand and extend what we learn about acceptability and feasibility of implementing the associated research activities, we anticipate participants will not identify any fatal flaws related to the conduct of an RCT.

  Through study completion, an average of 4 months

Secondary Outcomes (7)

• Child Maltreatment Vignette Scale

  Time 1 (one week before intervention), Time 2 (immediately after the intervention), Time 3 (3 month follow-up)

• Child Maltreatment Knowledge and Skills Questions (Developed by VEGA Team)

  Time 1 (one week before intervention), Time 2 (immediately after the intervention), Time 3 (3 month follow-up)

• The Physician Readiness to Manage Intimate Partner Violence Survey: IPV Knowledge

  Time 1 (one week before intervention), Time 2 (immediately after the intervention), Time 3 (3 month follow-up)

• The Physician Readiness to Manage Intimate Partner Violence Survey: Preparedness Subscale

  Time 1 (one week before intervention), Time 2 (immediately after the intervention), Time 3 (3 month follow-up)

• The Physician Readiness to Manage Intimate Partner Violence Survey: Opinions

  Time 1 (one week before intervention), Time 3 (3 month follow-up)

Other Outcomes (4)

• Previous Training in Intimate Partner Violence and Child Maltreatment

  Time 1 (one week before intervention)

• Thoughts and Beliefs about Recognizing and Responding to IPV and CM in Professional Roles

  Time 1 (one week before intervention), Time 2 (immediately after the intervention)

• Satisfaction with VEGA Training

  Time 2 (immediately after the intervention)

Study Arms (2)

Facilitator-Led VEGA

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

Facilitator-led VEGA uses a group-based approach where participants complete the Violence, Evidence, Guidance, Action Project (VEGA) content as a virtual or face-to-face workshop (i.e., facilitator-led VEGA). In this study, all workshops will be virtual to prevent social gathering during COVID-19. If a participant is randomized to this arm, the active control arm, they will be informed that they need to attend a facilitator-led VEGA session via virtual workshop format. The AC intervention will be facilitated via Zoom technology, by two trained facilitators with between 10 to 20 participants in each workshop (keeping the recommended 10:1 participant-to-facilitator ratio) and will last approximately 3 hours. The workshop approach is delivered by trained facilitators and is standardized via the use of a flexibly structured facilitator's guide. Facilitator-led VEGA will deliver material didactically with synchronous lecturing, use case-based role play, and include group-based polling.

Other: Violence, Evidence, Guidance, Action Project (VEGA) Education Intervention

Self-Directed VEGA

EXPERIMENTAL

Self-directed VEGA uses an approach where participants complete the Violence, Evidence, Guidance, Action Project (VEGA) content online as a self-directed educational activity, at their own pace in a series of modules. Individuals will register to access the VEGA Education Resources site. Participants have the option of completing the self-directed VEGA arm in either English or French as the VEGA Educational Resources site offers the content in French and English. If a participant is randomized to the experimental arm, they will be asked to complete the self-directed VEGA at their convenience, within one week of when they are informed they have been asked to complete the self-directed VEGA program. It will take approximately 3 hours for participants to complete all modules. Participants will read didactic material, complete case-based animated simulations, and complete individual multiple-choice questions with response feedback.

Other: Violence, Evidence, Guidance, Action Project (VEGA) Education Intervention

Interventions

Violence, Evidence, Guidance, Action Project (VEGA) Education Intervention OTHER

VEGA is a novel education intervention that has the potential to improve the preparation of healthcare and social service providers (HHSPs) to be able to effectively recognize and respond to intimate partner violence (IPV) and related forms of family violence, including child maltreatment (CM), in their clinical encounters. VEGA was developed based on systematic reviews and consultation with individuals belonging to 22 national healthcare and social service organizations, including the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. VEGA follows a competency-based framework and a participatory, encounter-based curriculum that includes four learning modules: (a) the epidemiology of IPV and CM; (b) strategies for safely recognizing and responding to (i) IPV and (ii) CM; and (c) principles for ensuring safe clinical encounters for IPV and CM discussions.

Also known as: VEGA Family Violence Education Resources

Facilitator-Led VEGA; Self-Directed VEGA

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 18 Years - 100 Years
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: Yes
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

• Participant is a regulated healthcare or social service provider that is an active member in good standing with the associated regulatory college.
• Participant is fluent in written and spoken English.
• We are looking for participants who are currently working with or have previous experience working with military and/or RCMP veterans or their family members. Participants must meet one of the following criteria:
• Participant works with military and/or RCMP veterans or family members of military and/or RCMP veterans in a direct service capacity at least one day per week OR
• Participant has two years or more of experience working with military and/or RCMP veterans or family members of military and/or RCMP veterans in a direct service capacity OR
• Participant has worked with 15 or more patients that were either military and/or RCMP veterans or family members of military and/or RCMP veterans in a direct service capacity.

You may not qualify if:

• Participant has previously accessed VEGA intervention materials.
• Participant is currently enrolled in or plans to enroll in any other educational intervention focused on family violence within the study time period (approximately next 3 months).

Sponsors & Collaborators

• McMaster University: lead
• Atlas Institute for Veterans and Families: collaborator

Study Sites (1)

McMaster University

Hamilton, Ontario, L8L 0A4, Canada

Location

Related Publications (29)

• Eldridge SM, Lancaster GA, Campbell MJ, Thabane L, Hopewell S, Coleman CL, Bond CM. Defining Feasibility and Pilot Studies in Preparation for Randomised Controlled Trials: Development of a Conceptual Framework. PLoS One. 2016 Mar 15;11(3):e0150205. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0150205. eCollection 2016.

  PMID: 26978655 BACKGROUND

• Pelletier HL, Knox M. Incorporating Child Maltreatment Training into Medical School Curricula. J Child Adolesc Trauma. 2017;10(3):267-274. doi: 10.1007/s40653-016-0096-x. Epub 2016 May 12.

  PMID: 29026450 BACKGROUND

• Connor PD, Nouer SS, Mackey ST, Tipton NG, Lloyd AK. Psychometric properties of an intimate partner violence tool for health care students. J Interpers Violence. 2011 Mar;26(5):1012-35. doi: 10.1177/0886260510365872. Epub 2010 Jun 28.

  PMID: 20587479 BACKGROUND

• Short LM, Alpert E, Harris JM Jr, Surprenant ZJ. A tool for measuring physician readiness to manage intimate partner violence. Am J Prev Med. 2006 Feb;30(2):173-180. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2005.10.009.

  PMID: 16459217 BACKGROUND

• Mathews B, Kenny MC. Mandatory reporting legislation in the United States, Canada, and Australia: a cross-jurisdictional review of key features, differences, and issues. Child Maltreat. 2008 Feb;13(1):50-63. doi: 10.1177/1077559507310613.

  PMID: 18174348 BACKGROUND

• Afifi TO, Taillieu T, Zamorski MA, Turner S, Cheung K, Sareen J. Association of Child Abuse Exposure With Suicidal Ideation, Suicide Plans, and Suicide Attempts in Military Personnel and the General Population in Canada. JAMA Psychiatry. 2016 Mar;73(3):229-38. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2015.2732.

  PMID: 26817953 BACKGROUND

• Afifi TO, Sareen J, Taillieu T, Stewart-Tufescu A, Mota N, Bolton SL, Asmundson GJG, Enns MW, Ports KA, Jetly R. Association of Child Maltreatment and Deployment-related Traumatic Experiences with Mental Disorders in Active Duty Service Members and Veterans of the Canadian Armed Forces: Association de la Maltraitance des Enfants et des Experiences Traumatisantes Liees au Deploiement Avec les Troubles Mentaux Chez les Membres du Service Actif et Les Anciens Combattants des Forces Armees Canadiennes. Can J Psychiatry. 2021 Nov;66(11):961-970. doi: 10.1177/0706743720987086. Epub 2021 Jan 21.

  PMID: 33472392 BACKGROUND

• Marshall AD, Panuzio J, Taft CT. Intimate partner violence among military veterans and active duty servicemen. Clin Psychol Rev. 2005 Nov;25(7):862-76. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2005.05.009.

  PMID: 16006025 BACKGROUND

• Sparrow K, Kwan J, Howard L, Fear N, MacManus D. Systematic review of mental health disorders and intimate partner violence victimisation among military populations. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2017 Sep;52(9):1059-1080. doi: 10.1007/s00127-017-1423-8. Epub 2017 Jul 26.

  PMID: 28748307 BACKGROUND

• Griffith J, J Bryan C. Deployment Experiences and Suicidal Behaviors Related to Interpersonal Violence Perpetration Among Army National Guard Soldiers. Violence Vict. 2020 Dec 1;35(6):841-860. doi: 10.1891/VV-D-18-00174.

  PMID: 33372113 BACKGROUND

• Zamorski MA, Wiens-Kinkaid ME. Cross-sectional prevalence survey of intimate partner violence perpetration and victimization in Canadian military personnel. BMC Public Health. 2013 Oct 28;13:1019. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-1019.

  PMID: 24165440 BACKGROUND

• MacMillan HL, Kimber M, Stewart DE. Intimate Partner Violence: Recognizing and Responding Safely. JAMA. 2020 Sep 22;324(12):1201-1202. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.11322. No abstract available.

  PMID: 32960228 BACKGROUND

• Stewart DE, MacMillan H, Kimber M. Recognizing and Responding to Intimate Partner Violence: An Update. Can J Psychiatry. 2021 Jan;66(1):71-106. doi: 10.1177/0706743720939676. Epub 2020 Aug 10. No abstract available.

  PMID: 32777936 BACKGROUND

• Beynon CE, Gutmanis IA, Tutty LM, Wathen CN, MacMillan HL. Why physicians and nurses ask (or don't) about partner violence: a qualitative analysis. BMC Public Health. 2012 Jun 21;12:473. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-12-473.

  PMID: 22721371 BACKGROUND

• Kimber M, McTavish JR, Couturier J, Le Grange D, Lock J, MacMillan HL. Identifying and responding to child maltreatment when delivering family-based treatment-A qualitative study. Int J Eat Disord. 2019 Mar;52(3):292-298. doi: 10.1002/eat.23036. Epub 2019 Feb 6.

  PMID: 30729594 BACKGROUND

• Kimber M, McTavish JR, Luo C, Couturier J, Dimitropoulos G, MacMillan H. Mandatory reporting of child maltreatment when delivering family-based treatment for eating disorders: A framework analysis of practitioner experiences. Child Abuse Negl. 2019 Feb;88:118-128. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2018.11.010. Epub 2018 Nov 23.

  PMID: 30476720 BACKGROUND

• McTavish JR, Kimber M, Devries K, Colombini M, MacGregor JCD, Wathen CN, Agarwal A, MacMillan HL. Mandated reporters' experiences with reporting child maltreatment: a meta-synthesis of qualitative studies. BMJ Open. 2017 Oct 16;7(10):e013942. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013942.

  PMID: 29042370 BACKGROUND

• Alnasser Y, Albijadi A, Abdullah W, Aldabeeb D, Alomair A, Alsaddiqi S, Alsalloum Y. Child maltreatment between knowledge, attitude and beliefs among Saudi pediatricians, pediatric residency trainees and medical students. Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2017 Feb 21;16:7-13. doi: 10.1016/j.amsu.2017.02.008. eCollection 2017 Apr.

  PMID: 28275426 BACKGROUND

• Inanici SY, Celik E, Hidiroglu S, Ozdemir M, Inanici MA. Factors associated with physicians' assessment and management of child abuse and neglect: A mixed method study. J Forensic Leg Med. 2020 Jul;73:101972. doi: 10.1016/j.jflm.2020.101972. Epub 2020 May 30.

  PMID: 32658746 BACKGROUND

• Flaherty EG, Sege R, Price LL, Christoffel KK, Norton DP, O'Connor KG. Pediatrician characteristics associated with child abuse identification and reporting: results from a national survey of pediatricians. Child Maltreat. 2006 Nov;11(4):361-9. doi: 10.1177/1077559506292287.

  PMID: 17043321 BACKGROUND

• Flaherty EG, Sege R, Binns HJ, Mattson CL, Christoffel KK. Health care providers' experience reporting child abuse in the primary care setting. Pediatric Practice Research Group. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2000 May;154(5):489-93. doi: 10.1001/archpedi.154.5.489.

  PMID: 10807301 BACKGROUND

• Regnaut O, Jeu-Steenhouwer M, Manaouil C, Gignon M. Risk factors for child abuse: levels of knowledge and difficulties in family medicine. A mixed method study. BMC Res Notes. 2015 Oct 30;8:620. doi: 10.1186/s13104-015-1607-9.

  PMID: 26514128 BACKGROUND

• Flaherty EG, Sege R. Barriers to physician identification and reporting of child abuse. Pediatr Ann. 2005 May;34(5):349-56. doi: 10.3928/0090-4481-20050501-08.

  PMID: 15948346 BACKGROUND

• Norman GR, Sloan JA, Wyrwich KW. The truly remarkable universality of half a standard deviation: confirmation through another look. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2004 Oct;4(5):581-5. doi: 10.1586/14737167.4.5.581.

  PMID: 19807551 BACKGROUND

• Crowe M, Inder M, Porter R. Conducting qualitative research in mental health: Thematic and content analyses. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2015 Jul;49(7):616-23. doi: 10.1177/0004867415582053. Epub 2015 Apr 21.

  PMID: 25900973 BACKGROUND

• Guetterman TC, Fetters MD, Creswell JW. Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Results in Health Science Mixed Methods Research Through Joint Displays. Ann Fam Med. 2015 Nov;13(6):554-61. doi: 10.1370/afm.1865.

  PMID: 26553895 BACKGROUND

• Flaherty EG, Sege R, Mattson CL, Binns HJ. Assessment of suspicion of abuse in the primary care setting. Ambul Pediatr. 2002 Mar-Apr;2(2):120-6. doi: 10.1367/1539-4409(2002)0022.0.co;2.

  PMID: 11926843 BACKGROUND

• Vaismoradi M, Turunen H, Bondas T. Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study. Nurs Health Sci. 2013 Sep;15(3):398-405. doi: 10.1111/nhs.12048. Epub 2013 Mar 11.

  PMID: 23480423 BACKGROUND

• Kimber M, Baker-Sullivan E, Stewart DE, Vanstone M. Improving Health Professional Recognition and Response to Child Maltreatment and Intimate Partner Violence: Protocol for Two Mixed Methods Pilot Randomized Controlled Trials. JMIR Res Protoc. 2024 Mar 21;13:e50864. doi: 10.2196/50864.

  PMID: 38512307 DERIVED

Related Links

• This is the VEGA Project website, where the public can access VEGA Family Violence Education Resources. More information can be found here about the development of VEGA.

MeSH Terms

Interventions

Counseling

Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Mental Health Services; Behavioral Disciplines and Activities; Community Health Services; Health Services; Health Care Facilities Workforce and Services

Study Officials

• Melissa Kimber, PhD, MSW, RSW

  McMaster University

  PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: SINGLE
• Who Masked: OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
• Masking Details: The Research Assistant will be blinded to group allocation. The RA will be responsible for following-up with participants to make sure they've completed quantitative assessments (online survey) or, if participants choose to complete the surveys over the phone, the RA will complete them over the phone with the participant.
• Purpose: OTHER
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
• PI Title: Assistant Professor, Department of Psychiatry & Behavioural Neurosciences

Model Details: To determine the feasibility of evaluating the effectiveness of both of VEGA's educational approaches, as well as to generate preliminary estimates of effect for sampling and effect size calculations, a two-arm pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) will be used (Eldridge et al., 2016). Eligible participants will be randomly assigned to receive either self-directed (i.e., experimental) or facilitator-led (i.e., active control (AC)) VEGA.

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: July 28, 2022
• First Posted: August 5, 2022
• Study Start: August 1, 2022
• Primary Completion: March 13, 2024
• Study Completion: March 13, 2024
• Last Updated: February 27, 2026

Record last verified: 2026-02

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will not share

Locations

CA (1)