The Effects of Peer Co-led Educational Group Intervention for Adults With Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)

The Effects of Peer Co-led Educational Group Intervention for Adults With Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity/Impulsivity Disorder

Peer co-led education describes educators who are expert patients, user representatives or former patients, participating and teaching in educational interventions in cooperation with health care professionals. Peer co-led education is included in the Norwegian national guidelines for treatment of mental disorders, but despite some promising results for the treatment of other conditions, still little is known about the efficacy of peer co-led educational group interventions interventions for adults with attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

This pilot trial will evaluate patient satisfaction with and preliminary efficacy of a 2-session peer co-led educational group program designed to address specific challenges faced by adults diagnosed with ADHD at an outpatient clinics in mid-Norway.

Study Overview

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

56

Phase

  • 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

      • Trondheim, Norway, 7055
        • Tiller DPS

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

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years to 67 years (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Confirmed ADHD-diagnosis
  • speaking a Scandinavian language

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Unable to give informed consent
  • Psychosis
  • Severe learning difficulties

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: Other
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Crossover Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Educational intervention
Patients randomized to the intervention group will start with a group-based educational program immediately after the randomization.
The group-based educational program consists of two sessions that run over two consecutive weeks. Each session consists of a lecture from a recruited expert on the topic of the session and by expert patients with a following discussion of the topic facilitated by the course leader.
Other Names:
  • Patient education
Diagnostic treatment with medication. In addition, some patients receive cognitive behavioral therapy (not systematically given to every patient). If needed, patients are also offered assistance with regard to economy, housing, education, and work as well as contact with family and network.
Other Names:
  • Treatment as usual
Active Comparator: Waiting list
Participants randomized to the waiting list control group receive no educational intervention for the duration of the 10 weeks. During this period participants can receive standard treatment, consisting of diagnostic treatment with medication.
Diagnostic treatment with medication. In addition, some patients receive cognitive behavioral therapy (not systematically given to every patient). If needed, patients are also offered assistance with regard to economy, housing, education, and work as well as contact with family and network.
Other Names:
  • Treatment as usual
No educational intervention for the duration of the 10 weeks. During this period participants can receive standard treatment.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change in client Satisfaction
Time Frame: from baseline to 2-weeks follow-up
Client satisfaction will be measured with Client Satisfaction Questionnaire, short form (Attkisson & Zwick, 1982). The scale consists of 8 items scored on a Likert scale from 1 (low satisfaction) to 4 (high satisfaction). Total scores range from 8 to 32, with higher scores indicating greater satisfaction.
from baseline to 2-weeks follow-up
change in patient activation
Time Frame: from baseline to 10-weeks follow-up
Patient activation will be measured with the Norwegian version of the Patient Activation Measure Mental Health (PAM-MH) (Green et al 2010))
from baseline to 10-weeks follow-up

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
change in general self-efficacy
Time Frame: from baseline to 10 weeks follow-up
General Self-Efficacy Scale, 6-item scale ranging from 1 ('not at all true') to 4 ('exactly true'). Total scores range from 6 to 24, with higher scores indicating greater self-efficacy. (Romppel et al 2013)
from baseline to 10 weeks follow-up
change in ADHD-related symptoms
Time Frame: from baseline to 10 weeks follow-up
Hopkin's Symptom Checklist (SCL), 9-items scale with high scores on SCL-9 indicating ADHD-related symptom burden (Eich et al 2011)
from baseline to 10 weeks follow-up
change in ADHD-related symptoms
Time Frame: from baseline to 10 weeks follow-up
Norwegian version of the WHO Adult ADHD Self-report scale, ASRS Short Form (Kessler et al 2005)
from baseline to 10 weeks follow-up
change in Quality of Life
Time Frame: from baseline to 10 weeks follow-up
Adult Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Quality of Life Scale, AAQoL short Form (Brod et al 2006)
from baseline to 10 weeks follow-up

Other Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Use of health services and work participation
Time Frame: through study completion, an average of 24 weeks
Self-reported work participation and received services: 3 questions about both work status and received treatment
through study completion, an average of 24 weeks

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Collaborators

Investigators

  • Study Director: Anne-Lise Løvaas, md phd, St. Olavs hospital

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)

May 31, 2018

Primary Completion (Actual)

March 15, 2020

Study Completion (Actual)

March 15, 2020

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

April 25, 2018

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

June 5, 2018

First Posted (Actual)

June 6, 2018

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

January 27, 2022

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 25, 2022

Last Verified

August 1, 2021

More Information

Terms related to this study

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

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.

Clinical Trials on Attention Deficit Disorder With Hyperactivity

Clinical Trials on Group-based education

Subscribe