A+ Treatment/Feasibility of Adapted ESDM-informed Caregiver Coaching Delivered Remotely for Children With ASD (Autism Spectrum Disorder) and ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder)

March 25, 2024 updated by: Duke University

Sub-study: Feasibility Trial of Adapted ESDM-informed Caregiver Coaching Delivered Remotely for Children With ASD and ADHD

This study will evaluate the feasibility of adapted ESDM-informed caregiver coaching in children with comorbid ASD and ADHD, who are between 36 and <132 months of age. There will be no study provided medication treatment in this study. Children will either be on ADHD medication prescribed by their own personal provider or will not be taking any ADHD medication (this will be documented by the study). The provided behavioral treatment will be eight ~60-minute sessions in ESDM-informed caregiver coaching delivered remotely through telehealth, for 8 consecutive weeks. The behavioral treatment is provided to children through Early Start Denver Model (ESDM)-informed caregiver coaching strategies, implemented within the child's typical daily routine by the caregiver.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Completed

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Detailed Description

The overarching goal of A+ Treatment is to evaluate feasibility and gather pilot data of remotely-delivered ESDM informed caregiver coaching for children with ASD and ADHD which may inform future combination clinical trials (pharmacotherapy and behavioral intervention). Using an implementation science approach, the investigators will characterize the acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility and fidelity of remote behavioral intervention. Approximately 30-35 participants who are between 36 months and <132 months of age with comorbid ASD and ADHD will take part in this study, which includes parent coaching sessions completed remotely. Total participation is expected to require a maximum of 20 weeks, including optional remote follow-up at 16 weeks. The A+ Treatment diagnostic and screening visits will generally occur between 1 and 6 weeks prior to baseline. The provided behavioral treatment will be eight ~60-minute weekly sessions of ESDM-informed caregiver coaching delivered remotely through telehealth, for 8 consecutive weeks. Endpoint assessments will be completed after the final coaching visit. No medication will be provided by the study team. The final assessment will be obtained at 16 weeks after baseline.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
57

Phase

Phase

The stage of a clinical trial studying a drug or biological product, based on definitions developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The phase is based on the study's objective, the number of participants, and other characteristics. There are five phases: Early Phase 1 (formerly listed as Phase 0), Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4. Not Applicable is used to describe trials without FDA-defined phases, including trials of devices or behavioral interventions.
  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • United States
    • North Carolina
      • Durham, North Carolina, United States, 27705
        • Duke University

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

3 years to 10 years (Child)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Provision of a parent/guardian signed and dated informed consent form.
  • Stated willingness of parent/guardian to comply with all study procedures and availability for the duration of the study.
  • Child is between 36 months and <132 months of age at baseline.
  • Child has a confirmed DSM-5 diagnosis of both ASD and ADHD, informed by results of assessments including: an ASD diagnostic assessment (Brief Observation of Symptoms of Autism [BOSA], Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule, 2nd Edition [ADOS-2], or TELE-ASD-PEDS, and if applicable the Autism Diagnostic Interview - Revised [ADI-R]) and an ADHD diagnostic (a standardized ADHD Diagnostic Interview and the MINI psychiatric diagnostic interview).

Exclusion Criteria:

  • If continuing psychotropic (CNS-active) medications, must not have been changed within 4 weeks prior to baseline.
  • Significant visual, auditory or motor impairments that would preclude participation in ESDM-informed caregiver coaching or completion of key assessments.
  • Inability of the caregiver participating in ESDM-informed caregiver coaching and responding to questionnaires to fluently speak English.
  • Study clinician judgment that it is not in the best interests of the participant and/or the study for the child to participate (including presence of psychiatric conditions or psychiatric symptoms in addition to ASD and ADHD that in the opinion of the PI or based on senior clinical review, would confound assessments and/or affect participation in the study).

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: N/A
  • Interventional Model: Single Group Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm

Participant Group / Arm

A group or subgroup of participants in a clinical trial that receives a specific intervention/treatment, or no intervention, according to the trial's protocol.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
Other: A+ Treatment/Feasibility participants
Total participation is expected to require a maximum of 20 weeks (plus optional remote follow-up at 16 week). Diagnostic/screening visits occur between 1 and 6 weeks prior to baseline and start of coaching. ESDM-informed parent coaching (~1 hour sessions) is delivered remotely (through telehealth) with a study clinician for 8 weeks and strategies are implemented within the child's typical daily routines by the caregiver. No medication is provided by the study team. Data is collected weekly and final assessment will be obtained at 16 weeks after baseline.
Behavioral: P-ESDM informed caregiver coaching
Caregiver coaching informed by P-ESDM done remotely (via telehealth)

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Number of Caregivers and Staff Who Completed Individual Qualitative Interviews to Assess the Acceptability, Appropriateness, and Feasibility of the Intervention
Time Frame: Week 9/Endpoint
Questions are tailored to stakeholder group and are informed by previous studies that have examined barriers and facilitators during the implementation of a new treatment approach. Interviews will be conducted after completing coaching sessions. Qualitative analysis will use an iterative coding and review process informed by grounded theory.
Week 9/Endpoint
Feasibility of Intervention (as Measured by Feasibility of Intervention Measure, FIM)
Time Frame: Week 9/Endpoint
The FIM is a four-item implementation outcome measure that measures the extent to which a new treatment, or an innovation, can be successfully used or carried out within a given agency or setting. Each item is rated on a 5-point ordinal scale from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree). The sum of ratings across all 4 items ranges from 4 to 20, where higher scores indicate greater feasibility, and lower scores indicate lower feasibility.
Week 9/Endpoint
Acceptability of Intervention (as Measured by the Acceptability of Intervention Measure, AIM)
Time Frame: Week 9/Endpoint
The AIM is a four-item implementation outcome measure that measures the extent to which a new treatment, or an innovation, can be successfully used or carried out within a given agency or setting. Each item is rated on a 5-point ordinal scale from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree). The sum of ratings across all 4 items ranges from 4 to 20, where higher scores indicate greater acceptability, and lower scores indicate lower acceptability.
Week 9/Endpoint
Appropriateness of Intervention (as Measured by the Intervention Appropriateness Measure, IAM)
Time Frame: Week 9/Endpoint
The IAM is a four-item implementation outcome measure that measures the extent to which a new treatment, or an innovation, can be successfully used or carried out within a given agency or setting. Each item is rated on a 5-point ordinal scale from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree). The sum of ratings across all 4 items ranges from 4 to 20, where higher scores indicate greater appropriateness, and lower scores indicate lower appropriateness.
Week 9/Endpoint
Changes From Baseline (Pre-intervention) to Week 9 (Post-intervention) in Fidelity of Intervention Delivery Using an Adapted Version of the Parent Early Start Denver Model (P-ESDM) Caregiver Fidelity Rating System
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 9
The caregiver fidelity rating system measure assesses fidelity of the caregiver in using ESDM principles during a joint activity with their child using ratings of performance on 13 items (1-5 scale). The sum of ratings is used for a total score, ranging from 13 to 65, where higher score is greater fidelity and lower scores indicate lower fidelity.
Baseline, Week 9

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Changes From Baseline (Pre-intervention) to 9-weeks (Post-intervention) in Caregiver Sense of Competence Measured by the Parent Sense of Competence Scale.
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 9
The parent sense of competence scale is a self-report measure that assesses parenting sense of competence in 3- to 17-year-old children. It is a 16-item 6-point Likert scale questionnaire with ratings ranging from strongly agree (1) to strongly disagree (6). It includes 2 validated factors: satisfaction (9 items) and efficacy (7 items). The scale ranges from 16 to 96, where higher scores indicate greater competence. Change will be measured using the score at each timepoint.
Baseline, Week 9
Change From Baseline (Pre-intervention) to 9 Weeks (Post-intervention) in Child Behaviors as Measured by Joint Engagement Rating Inventory (JERI)
Time Frame: Baseline, Week 9
Joint Engagement Rating Inventory (JERI) contains eighteen 7-point Likert scale items that characterized various aspects of joint engagement. The items were designed to span the range of possibilities likely to be observed during interactions with 18- to 30-month-old TD children as well as similarly aged and older children with developmental difficulties, including ASD. Reported is the change in the sum of 4 items from the JERI (Joint Engagement, Attention to Caregiver, Responsiveness to Partner's Communication Bids, Fluency and Connectedness) coded by a trained, reliable coder who is naïve with respect to whether the observation is from baseline our outcome using video-recorded caregiver-child interactions. The score range is 4 to 28, where a higher score indicates a greater amount of the aspect of joint engagement.
Baseline, Week 9

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
Duke University

Investigators

Investigators

A researcher involved in a clinical study. Related terms include site principal investigator, site sub-investigator, study chair, study director, and study principal investigator.
  • Principal Investigator: Geraldine Dawson, PhD, Duke University
  • Principal Investigator: Lauren Franz, M.B., CH.B., Duke University

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
December 16, 2020

Primary Completion (Actual)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
April 5, 2022

Study Completion (Actual)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
April 5, 2022

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
May 25, 2022

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
June 9, 2022

First Posted (Actual)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
June 14, 2022

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
March 26, 2024

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
March 25, 2024

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
March 1, 2024

More Information

Terms related to this study

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • Pro00085179_1

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

YES

IPD Plan Description

Through NDAR (National Database for Autism Research), core assessment and diagnostic data that is de-identified, including Vineland data and autism assessments.

IPD Sharing Time Frame

1 year after publication of the results for each of the specific aims or 3 years after the statistical analyses are completed

IPD Sharing Access Criteria

determined by committee of researchers/administrator at NDAR

IPD Sharing Supporting Information Type

  • STUDY_PROTOCOL

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings