IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0238286.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A pilot feasibility randomised controlled trial of two behaviour change interventions compared to usual care to reduce substance misuse in looked after children and care leavers aged 12-20 years: The SOLID study

Author

Listed:
  • Hayley Alderson
  • Eileen Kaner
  • Elaine McColl
  • Denise Howel
  • Tony Fouweather
  • Ruth McGovern
  • Alex Copello
  • Heather Brown
  • Paul McArdle
  • Deborah Smart
  • Rebecca Brown
  • Raghu Lingam

Abstract

Background: Young people in state care, often due to abuse or neglect, have a four-fold increased risk of drug and alcohol use compared to their peers. Aim: The SOLID study aimed to investigate the feasibility of a definitive randomised controlled trial, comparing two behaviour change interventions to reduce risky substance use (illicit drugs and alcohol), and improve mental health, in young people in care. Methods: We recruited young people in care aged 12–20 years, self-reporting substance use within the previous 12 months and residing in 1 of 6 participating local authority sites in the North East of England. Participants were randomised to either i. Motivational Enhancement Therapy (MET), ii. Social Behaviour and Network Therapy (SBNT) or iii. Control (usual care). All interventions were delivered by trained drug and alcohol workers. Follow-up data were collected 12 months post recruitment. Feasibility for trial progression was compared to pre-specified stop: go criteria (recruitment of 60% of eligible participants, 80% of participants attending 60% of offered sessions and retention of 70% of participants at 12 month follow up). Results: Of 1450 eligible participants, 860 (59%) were screened for drug and alcohol use by social workers, 211 (24.5%) met inclusion criteria for the trial and 112 young people (7.7%) consented and were randomised. Sixty of these 112 participants (54%) completed 12-month follow-up questionnaires. Only 15 out of the 76 (20%) participants allocated to an intervention arm attended any of the offered MET or SBNT sessions. Conclusion: By reference to pre-specified stop: go criteria it is not feasible to conduct a definitive trial for SOLID in its current format. Despite co-designing procedures with staff and young people in care, the screening, referral and treatment pathway did not work here. Future work may require dedicated clinically embedded research resource to evaluate effectiveness of new interventions in services.

Suggested Citation

  • Hayley Alderson & Eileen Kaner & Elaine McColl & Denise Howel & Tony Fouweather & Ruth McGovern & Alex Copello & Heather Brown & Paul McArdle & Deborah Smart & Rebecca Brown & Raghu Lingam, 2020. "A pilot feasibility randomised controlled trial of two behaviour change interventions compared to usual care to reduce substance misuse in looked after children and care leavers aged 12-20 years: The ," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-20, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0238286
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0238286
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0238286
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0238286&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0238286?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0238286. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.