About this trial

This project entails to gain a deeper understanding of the development of treatment motivation over the course of intramural and outpatient forensic youth care. Research questions are 1) How does treatment motivation of youth and parents develop over the course of forensic systemic therapy, and following the transition from inpatient to outpatient therapy?; 2) Which client factors, interpersonal factors, and contextual characteristics moderate the development of treatment motivation?; 3) Which mechanisms play a role in the development of treatment motivation?; and 4) How does treatment motivation affect treatment retention and the achievement of primary therapy goals?

Eligibility criteria

This trial does not accept healthy volunteers

Qualifiers

None

Disqualifiers

None

Trial population

Residents in a juvenile justice center

Trial design

Design model

Case-crossover

Time perspective

Prospective

Treatments tested in this trial

Multidimensional Family Therapy
Behavioral
Multidimensional family therapy is a manualized,evidence-based, intensive intervention program with assessment and treatment modules focusing on four areas: (a) the individual adolescents' issues regarding substance use disorder, delinquency, and comorbid psychopathology, (b) the parents' child-rearing skills and personal functioning, (c) communication and relationship between adolescent and parent(s), and (d) interactions between family members and key social systems (Liddle, 2002).

Treatment groups

16 Participants

are divided into 2 treatment groups

Group A: short-stay residents juvenile justice center1 intervention

Group B: long-stay residents juvenile justice center1 intervention

Trial outcomes

Primary outcomes

1

Treatment motivation youth perspective (validated questionnaires)

Treatment Motivation Questionnaire for Adolescents (van der Helm et al., 2013; van der Helm et al., 2018; 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree), with a higher score indicating more motivation for treatment; Cooperation Scale (Tolan et al., 2002; 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree. A higher total score indicates more motivation for treatment).

Time frame

at least 5 times during phase A (2-6 weeks); every other week during phase B (1-9 months; at least 5 assessments), at least 5 times during phase C (1-3 months).

2

Treatment motivation caregiver perspective (validated questionnaires)

Parent Motivation Inventory (Nock \& Photos, 2006); Cooperation Scale (Tolan et al., 2002). Participants respond on a 5-point Likert scale on both questionnaires ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree). Higher total scores indicate more motivation for treatment.

Time frame

at least 5 times during phase A (2-6 weeks); every other week during phase B (1-9 months; at least 5 assessments), at least 5 times during phase C (1-3 months).

3

Treatment motivation therapist perspective (validated questionnaires)

Cooperation Scale (Tolan et al., 2002; 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree). A higher score indicates more motivation for treatment).

Time frame

every other week during phase B (1-9 months; at least 5 assessments), at least 5 times during phase C (1-3 months).

4

Treatment motivation (qualitative data)

Youth/Caregivers: semi-structured interview

Time frame

Youth/Caregivers: at the end of each phase (A (after 2-6 weeks), B (after 1-9 months) and C (after 1-3 months))

Secondary outcomes

1

Therapeutic alliance youth perspective

Session Rating Scale (SRS; Duncan et al., 2003). The SRS is scored by adding the total of the client's marks on the four 10-cm lines, with a higher total score indicating a stronger alliance.

Time frame

every other week during phase B (1-9 months; at least 5 assessments), at least 5 times during phase C (1-3 months).

2

Therapeutic alliance caregiver perspective

Session Rating Scale (Duncan et al., 2003). The SRS is scored by adding the total of the client's marks on the four 10-cm lines, with a higher total score indicating a stronger alliance.

Time frame

every other week during phase B (1-9 months; at least 5 assessments), at least 5 times during phase C (1-3 months).

3

Sense of competence youth perspective

Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction and Frustration Scale (Chen et al., 2015), subscales Competence Satisfaction and Competence Frustration. Participants respond on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree). A higher total score indicates a higher sense of competence.

Time frame

at least 5 times during phase A (2-6 weeks); every other week during phase B (1-9 months; at least 5 assessments), at least 5 times during phase C (1-3 months).

4

Sense of competence caregiver perspective

Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction and Frustration Scale (Chen et al., 2015), subscales Competence Satisfaction and Competence Frustration. Participants respond on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree). A higher total score indicates a higher sense of competence.

Time frame

at least 5 times during phase A (2-6 weeks); every other week during phase B (1-9 months; at least 5 assessments), at least 5 times during phase C (1-3 months).

MOTIV8 - Treatment Motivation in Forensic Youth Treatment

About this trial

Eligibility criteria

Qualifiers

Disqualifiers

Trial population

Trial design

Treatments tested in this trial

Treatment groups

Trial outcomes

Primary outcomes

Secondary outcomes

Other outcomes

Sponsors and contacts