Team-Focused Implementation in Child Advocacy Centers

NCT05679154 | Completed

• 2 other identifiers: STUDY21010070K23MH123729
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 147
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

Child Advocacy Centers (CACs) are well-positioned to identify children at risk for mental health problems and to facilitate access to evidence-based treatments. Implementation of standardized mental health screening and referral protocols may improve recognition of mental health needs and facilitate treatment engagement. Implementation strategies that improve teamwork may enhance implementation outcomes in team-based settings like CACs. In this study, CACs will implement the Care Process Model for Pediatric Traumatic Stress (CPM-PTS) and be randomized to either team-focused implementation or standard implementation. The study aims are to evaluate the feasibility of team-focused implementation and the effect of the CPM-PTS on caregiver understanding of mental health needs and intentions to initiate treatment.

Conditions

Mental Health Issue; Teamwork

Keywords

Mental health screening; Implementation; Teamwork

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (9)

• Acceptability of team-focused implementation assessed by the Acceptability of Intervention Measure

  Perceived acceptability of team-focused implementation will be assessed with items from the Acceptability of Intervention Measure. Each item is rated on a 1-5 Likert scale. Scores will be averaged; higher scores indicate more positive perceptions (range 1-5).

  Baseline

• Acceptability of team-focused implementation assessed by the Acceptability of Intervention Measure

  Perceived acceptability of team-focused implementation will be assessed with items from the Acceptability of Intervention Measure. Each item is rated on a 1-5 Likert scale. Scores will be averaged; higher scores indicate more positive perceptions (range 1-5).

  Month 6

• Acceptability of team-focused implementation assessed by the Acceptability of Intervention Measure

  Perceived acceptability of team-focused implementation will be assessed with items from the Acceptability of Intervention Measure. Each item is rated on a 1-5 Likert scale. Scores will be averaged; higher scores indicate more positive perceptions (range 1-5).

  Month 12

• Appropriateness of team-focused implementation assessed by the Intervention Appropriateness Measure

  Perceived appropriateness of team-focused implementation will be assessed with items from the Intervention Appropriateness Measure. Each item is rated on a 1-5 Likert scale. Scores will be averaged; higher scores indicate more positive perceptions (range 1-5).

  Baseline

• Appropriateness of team-focused implementation assessed by the Intervention Appropriateness Measure

  Perceived appropriateness of team-focused implementation will be assessed with items from the Intervention Appropriateness Measure. Each item is rated on a 1-5 Likert scale. Scores will be averaged; higher scores indicate more positive perceptions (range 1-5).

  Month 6

• Appropriateness of team-focused implementation assessed by the Intervention Appropriateness Measure

  Perceived appropriateness of team-focused implementation will be assessed with items from the Intervention Appropriateness Measure. Each item is rated on a 1-5 Likert scale. Scores will be averaged; higher scores indicate more positive perceptions (range 1-5).

  Month 12

• Feasibility of team-focused implementation assessed by the Feasibility of Intervention Measure

  Perceived feasibility of team-focused implementation will be assessed with items from the Feasibility of Intervention Measure. Each item is rated on a 1-5 Likert scale. Scores will be averaged; higher scores indicate more positive perceptions (range 1-5).

  Baseline

• Feasibility of team-focused implementation assessed by the Feasibility of Intervention Measure

  Perceived feasibility of team-focused implementation will be assessed with items from the Feasibility of Intervention Measure. Each item is rated on a 1-5 Likert scale. Scores will be averaged; higher scores indicate more positive perceptions (range 1-5).

  Month 6

• Feasibility of team-focused implementation assessed by the Feasibility of Intervention Measure

  Perceived feasibility of team-focused implementation will be assessed with items from the Feasibility of Intervention Measure. Each item is rated on a 1-5 Likert scale. Scores will be averaged; higher scores indicate more positive perceptions (range 1-5).

  Month 12

Secondary Outcomes (11)

• Change in team functioning from baseline to 6-month follow-up

  Baseline, month 6

• Change in team functioning from baseline to 12-month follow-up

  Baseline, month 12

• Change in team performance from baseline to 6- and 12-month follow-up

  Baseline, month 6, month 12

• CPM-PTS Acceptability assessed by the Acceptability of Intervention Measure

  Month 6

• CPM-PTS Acceptability assessed by the Acceptability of Intervention Measure

  Month 12

Other Outcomes (2)

• Caregiver understanding of child mental health needs

  Collected immediately after CAC visit for all caregivers served during an 18 month period (beginning 6 months before CPM-PTS implementation and continuing for 12 months after implementation)

• Caregiver intention to initiate mental health services

  Collected immediately after CAC visit for all caregivers served during an 18 month period (beginning 6 months before CPM-PTS implementation and continuing for 12 months after implementation)

Study Arms (2)

Team-focused Implementation

EXPERIMENTAL

Behavioral: Team-focused Implementation

Standard Implementation

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

Behavioral: Standard Implementation

Interventions

Team-focused Implementation BEHAVIORAL

CACs randomized to the experimental condition (n = 2) will participate in team-focused implementation. They will receive team development interventions (e.g., goal-setting exercise, training in communication skills) integrated with standard CPM-PTS training and technical assistance strategies.

Team-focused Implementation

Standard Implementation BEHAVIORAL

CACs randomized to the comparison condition (n = 2) will receive standard training and technical assistance strategies to support CPM-PTS implementation. They will receive CPM-PTS materials (e.g., manual, REDCap surveys, referral protocols), an interactive training, and six months of technical assistance.

Standard Implementation

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 18 Years+
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: No
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

• Individuals at least 18 years of age who are members of the multidisciplinary team at the participating CACs.

You may not qualify if:

• Under 18 years old.

Sponsors & Collaborators

• University of Pittsburgh: lead
• National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH): collaborator

Study Sites (1)

University of Pittsburgh

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 15213, United States

Location

Related Publications (1)

• McGuier EA, Aarons GA, Wright JD, Fortney JC, Powell BJ, Rothenberger SD, Weingart LR, Miller E, Kolko DJ. Team-focused implementation strategies to improve implementation of mental health screening and referral in rural Children's Advocacy Centers: study protocol for a pilot cluster randomized hybrid type 2 trial. Implement Sci Commun. 2023 May 26;4(1):58. doi: 10.1186/s43058-023-00437-z.

  PMID: 37237302 DERIVED

Study Officials

• Elizabeth McGuier, PhD

  University of Pittsburgh

  PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: NONE
• Purpose: HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
• PI Title: Assistant Professor

Model Details: The trial includes two groups: team-focused implementation and standard implementation (comparison group).

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: December 15, 2022
• First Posted: January 10, 2023
• Study Start: July 31, 2024
• Primary Completion: October 8, 2025
• Study Completion: October 8, 2025
• Last Updated: October 28, 2025

Record last verified: 2025-10

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will share
• Shared Documents: STUDY PROTOCOL, SAP, ICF, ANALYTIC CODE
• Time Frame: Data will be available after manuscripts reporting the main findings are accepted for publication.
• Access Criteria: Contact the principal investigator to request access to the deidentified data.

Locations

US (1)