Search

Background: This paper describes the protocols for a randomized controlled trial using a parallel-group trial design that includes an intervention designed to address social isolation and loneliness among people experiencing homelessness known as Miracle Friends and an intervention that combines Miracles Friends with an economic poverty-reduction intervention known as Miracle Money. Miracle Friends pairs an unhoused person with a volunteer "phone buddy." Miracle Money provides guaranteed basic income of $750 per month for 1 year to Miracle Friends participants. The study will examine whether either intervention reduces social isolation or homelessness compared to a waitlist control group., Methods: Unhoused individuals who expressed interest in the Miracle Friends program were randomized to either receive the intervention or be placed on a waitlist for Miracle Friends. Among those randomized to receive the Miracle Friends intervention, randomization also determined whether they would be offered Miracle Money. The possibility of receiving basic income was only disclosed to study participants if they were randomly selected and participated in the Miracle Friends program. All study participants, regardless of assignment, were surveyed every 3 months for 15 months., Results: Of 760 unhoused individuals enrolled in the study, 256 were randomized to receive Miracle Friends, 267 were randomized to receive Miracle Money, and 237 were randomized to the waitlist control group. In the two intervention groups, 360 of 523 unhoused individuals were initially matched to a phone buddy. Of the 191 study participants in the Miracle Money group who had been initially matched to a volunteer phone buddy, 103 were deemed to be participating in the program and began receiving monthly income., Discussion: This randomized controlled trial will determine whether innovative interventions involving volunteer phone support and basic income reduce social isolation and improve housing outcomes for people experiencing homelessness. Although we enrolled unhoused individuals who initially expressed interest in the Miracle Friends program, the study team could not reach approximately 30% of individuals referred to the study. This may reflect the general lack of stability in the lives of people who are unhoused or limitations in the appeal of such a program to some portion of the unhoused population., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05408884 (first submitted on May 26, 2022)., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Permanent supportive housing (PSH) is an evidence-based practice to address homelessness that is implemented using 2 distinct approaches. The first approach is place-based PSH (PB-PSH), or single-site housing placement, in which an entire building with on-site services is designated for people experiencing homelessness. The second approach is scatter-site PSH (SS-PSH), which uses apartments rented from a private landlord while providing mobile case management services., Objective: This paper describes the protocols for a mixed methods comparative effectiveness study of 2 distinct approaches to implementing PSH and the patient-centered quality of life, health care use, and health behaviors that reduce COVID-19 risk., Methods: People experiencing homelessness who are placed in either PB-PSH or SS-PSH completed 6 monthly surveys after move-in using smartphones provided by the study team. A subsample of participants completed 3 qualitative interviews at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months that included photo elicitation interviewing. Two stakeholder advisory groups, including one featuring people with lived experience of homelessness, helped guide study decisions and interpretations of findings., Results: Study recruitment was supposed to occur over 6 months starting in January 2021 but was extended due to delays in recruitment. These delays included COVID-19 delays (eg, recruitment sites shut down due to outbreaks and study team members testing positive) and delays that may have been indirectly related to the COVID-19 pandemic, including high staff turnover or recruitment sites having competing priorities. In end-July 2022, in total, 641 people experiencing homelessness had been referred from 26 partnering recruitment sites, and 563 people experiencing homelessness had enrolled in the study and completed a baseline demographic survey. Of the 563 participants in the study, 452 had recently moved into the housing when they enrolled, with 272 placed in PB-PSH and 180 placed in SS-PSH. Another 111 participants were approved but are still waiting for housing placement. To date, 49 participants have been lost to follow-up, and 12% of phones (70 of the initial 563 distributed) were reported lost by participants., Conclusions: Recruitment during the pandemic, while successful, was challenging given that in-person contact was not permitted at times either by program sites or the research institutions during COVID-19 surges and high community transmission, which particularly affected homelessness programs in Los Angeles County. To overcome recruitment challenges, flexible strategies were used, which included extending the recruitment period and the distribution of cell phones with paid data plans. Given current recruitment numbers and retention rates that are over 90%, the study will be able to address a gap in the literature by considering the comparative effectiveness of PB-PSH versus SS-PSH on patient-centered quality of life, health care use, and health behaviors that reduce COVID-19 risk, which can influence future public health approaches to homelessness and infectious diseases., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04769349; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04769349., International Registered Report Identifier (irrid): DERR1-10.2196/46782., (©Benjamin F Henwood, Randall Kuhn, Howard Padwa, Roya Ijadi-Maghsoodi, Gisele Corletto, Alex Lawton, Jessie Chien, Ricky Bluthenthal, Michael R Cousineau, Melissa Chinchilla, Bikki Tran Smith, Katherine D Vickery, Taylor Harris, Maria Patanwala, Whitney Akabike, Lillian Gelberg. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (https://www.researchprotocols.org), 28.04.2023.)

Service members who transition out of the military often face substantial challenges during their transition to civilian life. Leaving military service requires establishing a new community as well as sense of connectedness to that community. Little is known about how social connectedness may be related to other prominent transition outcomes, particularly symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The purpose of this study was to explore the role of social connectedness in the development of PTSD, as well as its relationship to the known risk factors of combat exposure and discharge status. Data used were drawn from a needs assessment survey of 722 veterans. A path model was specified to test direct and indirect effects of combat experiences, non-honorable discharge status, and social connectedness on PTSD symptoms. Results demonstrated positive direct effects for combat experiences and non-honorable discharge status on PTSD symptoms while social connectedness demonstrated a negative direct effect. Both combat experiences and non-honorable discharge status demonstrated negative direct effects on social connectedness and indirect on PTSD through the social connectedness pathway. Study findings indicate social connectedness may be an important factor related to PTSD in veterans as well as an intervention point for mitigating risk related to combat exposure and discharge status.