- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT03688919
Adolescent Interventions to Manage Self-regulation of T1D (AIMS T1D)
Targeting Self-regulation to Promote Adherence and Health Behaviors in Children
Study Overview
Status
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
The goal of this study is to test whether interventions change self-regulation (SR) targets most relevant for medication adherence in youth with Type 1 Diabetes (T1D). Poor self-regulation has been identified in youth with T1D and is proposed as a central mechanism contributing to high rates of nonadherence and thus long-term complications, in pediatric T1D populations, particularly adolescents. As responsibility for T1D management shifts from parent to youth during this time, addressing self-regulation in adolescence is critical.
The study's self-regulation targets are executive functioning (EF; working memory, inhibitory control); emotion regulation (ER; capacity to manage stress, worry), and future orientation (FO; capacity to focus on future goals). The investigators posit that these self-regulation capacities are critical in order to engage in the multiple adherence behaviors (e.g., self-monitoring blood glucose, administering insulin via daily injections or a pump, regulating carbohydrate intake, physical activity, minimizing hyper-/hypo-glycemia) youth must follow to achieve and maintain optimal glycemic control. Thus, in addition to targeting T1D-specific adherence, it is essential to employ an experimental medicine approach to test whether improving self-regulation results in improved adherence behaviors and T1D-related health outcomes (quality of life; HbA1C). Yet, these self-regulation targets have not been rigorously tested as mechanisms of behavior change to improve adherence to T1D regimens in youth.
Using previously developed multimethod assays of these targets, the investigators will test the impact of interventions on these self-regulation targets, medical regimen adherence behaviors, and diabetes-related health outcomes (quality of life; HbA1C) in youth. The Scientific Premise is that poor self-regulation underlies poor medical regimen adherence. If improving self-regulation targets increase adherence in youth with T1D this approach may apply to other youth who must manage medical regimens. Findings will thus not only inform understanding of self-regulation as a mechanism of behavior change but will generate novel intervention strategies that may have trans-diagnostic implications and broad impact. As interventions to be delivered are designed to be light-touch and scalable, they may yield useful tools to use in future studies of behavior change mechanisms. The investigators propose an RCT design to test the following Specific Aims in a sample of youth with T1D (ages 13-17 years, n=94):
Aim 1. Test the hypothesis that the interventions developed in a prior study (NCT03060863) enhance identified self-regulation targets (EF, ER, FO) in a population of adolescents with T1D.
Aim 2. Test whether interventions improve medical regimen adherence behaviors and T1D health outcomes.
Exploratory Aim. Examine whether parents' SR modifies the effects of the UH3's bundled intervention to improve youth SR on youth treatment regimen adherence.
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
Michigan
-
Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States, 48109
- University of Michigan
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- youth must have been diagnosed with T1D for at least 6 months;
- reside with a parent;
- have HbA1c>=7.0;
- regular access to WiFi; and
- feel comfortable speaking English enough to complete study activities; and
Exclusion Criteria:
- non-fluency in English in parent or youth;
- psychiatric or cognitive conditions (e.g., clinically significant depression assessed via phone screen at intake) that would impede ability to participate.
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: PREVENTION
- Allocation: RANDOMIZED
- Interventional Model: PARALLEL
- Masking: NONE
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / Arm |
Intervention / Treatment |
---|---|
NO_INTERVENTION: Comparison
Adolescents and their families in this group will not receive any of the interventions.
|
|
EXPERIMENTAL: Self-Regulation Intervention
This arm will use a computer-based working memory training game (NBack) targeting Executive Functioning and in-person relaxation and biofeedback training targeting Emotion Regulation.
As well, adolescents will receive Future Orientation training by being asked to envision and describe future events they are looking forward to, using concrete, vivid descriptive language.
|
The intervention targets Executive Functioning (EF), Emotion Regulation (ER) and Future Orientation (FO).
The intervention will occur through home practice and text based reminders and mobile apps to practice techniques.
For EF, youth will use the NBack intervention, a computer-based working memory training game.
For ER, participants will engage in relaxation and biofeedback activities by completing activities (e.g., modulating breathing to keep heart rate) while wearing sensors.
For FO, participants will envision and describe future events they are looking forward to, using concrete, vivid descriptive language.
These descriptions will be audio recorded so that the participant can play back the cues at home at specified times of day (e.g., 7am and 3:30PM).
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
---|---|---|
Change From Baseline in Youth Executive Function (Behavioral EF) at 8 Weeks (Z-score)
Time Frame: baseline and 8 weeks
|
Behavioral EF will be measured using standard tasks (Forward/Backward Digit Span, Go No Go).
In Digit Span, subjects repeat numbers presented aloud in order or reverse order (8 questions of 2 trials each; correct response is 1 point; incorrect or no response is 0 points).
Scores are summed for each trial; maximum total raw score is 16 points.
In Go No Go, subjects hit a key to respond when they see the 'go' stimulus (presented for 300 ms) but not when they see the no-go stimulus.
Go No Go responses are scored based on reaction time (seconds) and accuracy (0-100%).
Then, we will generate a composite variable indicating better EF (i.e.
correct Digit Span responses, faster/more accurate Go No Go responses) by creating standardized z-scores for each task variable and calculating a mean score.
The final variable analyzed will be the composite z-score that represents behavioral EF, scored such that higher scores indicate better EF and with a Z-score of 0 representing the population mean.
|
baseline and 8 weeks
|
Change From Baseline in Youth Executive Function (EF-report by Parent and Self) at 8 Weeks (Z-score)
Time Frame: baseline and 8 weeks
|
Youth EF-report will be assessed using parent- and self-report versions of The Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Functioning, 2nd Edition (BRIEF-2), a standardized EF measure.
Items assess ability to control impulses, pay attention, modulate responses, and anticipate events.
Three broad indices are calculated (Behavior Regulation, or ability to control behavioral impulses; Emotion Regulation, or ability to control emotional reactions; and Cognitive Regulation, or ability to focus, pay attention, stay organized) and combined to form a Global Executive Composite (GEC) score, which is a standardized score representing overall EF difficulty (range 0-100).
Youth and parent GEC scores are averaged to represent overall Global Executive Functioning.
The final variable analyzed will be the composite z-score that combines youth- and parent-reported EF, scored such that higher scores indicate poorer EF and with a Z-score of 0 representing the population mean.
|
baseline and 8 weeks
|
Change From Baseline in Youth Emotion Regulation (ER-report by Parent and Self) at 8 Weeks (Z-score)
Time Frame: baseline and 8 weeks
|
ER will be measured using a composite measure of parent- and self-reports on the NIH Toolbox Perceived Stress Survey, a 10-item measure of stress in children (items are summed to indicate greater perceived stress; range: 0-40); youth self-reports of dysregulated affect using a 6-item scale based on the Structured Interview for Disorders of Extreme Stress (SIDES Affect Dysregulation Scale; items are averaged to indicate more affect dysregulation, range: 1-6); and youth reports of emotion experiences on the 20-item Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS; items are summed to indicate more negative [10 items] and fewer positive experiences [10 items]; range: 10-50).
The composite ER measure will be created by standardizing and averaging PSS, SIDES, and PANAS scores.
The final variable analyzed will be this composite z-score that represents ER, scored such that higher scores indicate worse ER and with a Z-score of 0 representing the population mean.
|
baseline and 8 weeks
|
Change From Baseline in Youth Self-Efficacy (Parent- and Self-reported) at 8 Weeks (Z-score)
Time Frame: baseline and 8 weeks
|
Youth self-efficacy is hypothesized to promote future-oriented thinking, and is thus an aspect of Future Orientation that will be measured using a composite of the NIH Toolbox Self-Efficacy parent report form and the self-report form.
Both forms consist of 10 items.
Participants respond to questions about their child's or their own (in the case of the child) self-efficacy.
Mean scores are generated; higher scores are indicative of greater perceived self-efficacy.
The final variable analyzed will be the composite z-score that represents youth self-efficacy based on parent and youth report, standardized and averaged and scored such that higher scores indicate better Self-efficacy and with a Z-score of 0 representing the population mean.
|
baseline and 8 weeks
|
Change From Baseline in Youth Future Orientation (Self-report) at 8 Weeks (Z-score)
Time Frame: baseline and 8 weeks
|
Considering the future and how one's actions can affect future consequences is an aspect of youth Future Orientation (FO) that will be measured using the Consideration of Future Consequences Scale.
Youth will answer 14 questions (e.g., "I think about how things would be in days to come, and try to influence those things in my daily behavior") on a 7-point scale ranging from 1=Not at all like me to 7=Neutral.
Higher scores indicate a greater consideration of future consequences or forward looking behavior.
The final variable analyzed will be a z-score that represents self-reported FO, scored such that higher scores indicate better FO and with a Z-score of 0 representing the population mean.
|
baseline and 8 weeks
|
Change From Baseline in Youth Future Orientation (Objective Measure) at 8 Weeks (Z-score)
Time Frame: baseline and 8 weeks
|
The degree to which one discounts the future is an aspect of youth Future Orientation (FO) that will be objectively measured using 5-trial Delay Discounting Task.
Each 5-trial version of this task uses one monetary amount per trial (e.g., $1, 000; $1, 000, 000).
Participants are asked on the first trial of the task whether they would prefer to receive that amount in three weeks or half that amount now.
On the next trial the question is repeated but with a different time delay according to response on the previous trial.
That is, a greater delay is presented on the next trial if the participant chose "now" on the previous trial, whereas a lesser delay is presented if the participant chose the later time on the previous trial.
The dependent measure is the steepness of the delay discounting curve.
The final variable analyzed will be the z-score that represents this discount rate; higher scores indicate poorer FO and with a Z-score of 0 representing the population mean.
|
baseline and 8 weeks
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
---|---|---|
Change From Baseline in Number of Participants Conducting Blood Glucose Monitoring at 8 Weeks
Time Frame: baseline and 8 weeks
|
Change in blood glucose monitoring (BGM) frequency will be assessed by downloading data from the prior two weeks from the adolescent's glucometer.
Adherence to BGM is defined as an average of 4 blood glucose measurements/day.
Note, we had missing data for the downloads due to changes in clinical care since this measure was proposed (only 30% of the sample had only meters so were not recommended by their provider to download their meters in this way; 70% of the sample had Continuous Glucose Monitors (CGM).
Thus, we used the data from self-reported monitoring or CGM use, measured by youth self-report on a Type 1 Diabetes adherence measure administered to all patients in the clinic that has been linked to HbA1c level (Lee et al., 2021).
|
baseline and 8 weeks
|
Change From Baseline in in Number of Participants With Insulin Administration Adherence at 8 Weeks
Time Frame: baseline and 8 weeks
|
Insulin administration adherence is defined as at least 3 short acting insulin boluses/day vs not.
This is measured by youth self-report on a Type 1 Diabetes adherence measure administered to all Type 1 Diabetes patients in the clinic and has been linked to Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), an indicator of blood glucose level (Lee et al., 2021).
|
baseline and 8 weeks
|
Change From Baseline in Self-Care Inventory Revised at 8 Weeks (Z-score)
Time Frame: baseline and 8 weeks
|
The Self-Care Inventory Revised (SCI-R) is a 14-item youth- and parent-report measure of multiple T1D self-care adherence behaviors.
Items reflect main aspects of the T1D regimen, including: monitoring and recording glucose, administering and adjusting insulin, regulating meals and exercise, and keeping appointments.
Respondents report on adherence behaviors on a 5-point scale (1="never do it"; 5="always do this as recommended without fail"; or N/A.).
The final variable analyzed will be the composite z-score that represents SCI-R adherence based on youth and parent reports, standardized and averaged and scored such that higher scores indicate better adherence and with a Z-score of 0 representing the population mean.
|
baseline and 8 weeks
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Collaborators
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Alison Miller, Ph.D., University of Michigan
- Principal Investigator: Emily Fredericks, Ph.D., University of Michigan
Publications and helpful links
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (ACTUAL)
Primary Completion (ACTUAL)
Study Completion (ACTUAL)
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (ACTUAL)
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (ACTUAL)
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Keywords
Other Study ID Numbers
- UH3HD087979 (NIH)
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
IPD Plan Description
IPD Sharing Time Frame
IPD Sharing Access Criteria
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
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 Medication Adherence
-
Medical University of South CarolinaNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)RecruitingMedication Adherence | Medication ComplianceUnited States
-
Vanderbilt University Medical CenterCompletedAdherence, Medication | Nonadherence, MedicationUnited States
-
Universidad Autonoma de Baja CaliforniaCompletedMedication Adherence | Medication ComplianceMexico
-
NYU Langone HealthRobert Wood Johnson Foundation; New York City Health and Hospitals CorporationCompletedMedication Adherence | Medication ErrorsUnited States
-
Universiti Putra MalaysiaCompletedMedication Adherence | Adherence, TreatmentPakistan
-
University Hospital, Basel, SwitzerlandUniversity of BaselCompletedPolymedication-Check With Insight in Patients' Medication Organisation and Comprehension of GenericsMedication Adherence | Medication Therapy ManagementSwitzerland
-
Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation TrustKing's College London; Sir Halley Stewart TrustCompletedMedication Adherence | Medication Compliance | Attitude | CaregiversUnited Kingdom
-
National Healthcare Group, SingaporeCompletedMedication Adherence | Medication Administered in Error
-
Roswell Park Cancer InstituteActive, not recruitingMedication AdherenceUnited States
-
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public HealthBill and Melinda Gates Foundation; Jhpiego; Center for Vaccine Development -...Completed
Clinical Trials on Self-Regulation Intervention
-
University of California, DavisEnrolling by invitationInfant Behavior | Infant Development | Self-Control | Self-Regulation, EmotionUnited States
-
University of North Carolina, Chapel HillCompletedObesity | Weight Loss | Weight Gain PreventionUnited States
-
University of MichiganNational Institute on Aging (NIA)Completed
-
Boston CollegeJoslin Diabetes CenterCompleted
-
University of HoustonAmerican Cancer Society, Inc.; Herald Cancer AssociationCompletedBreast Cancer | Breast NeoplasmsUnited States
-
Wayne State UniversityCompletedHypertension | HemodialysisUnited States
-
UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer CenterCompletedBreast Neoplasms | Body Weight ChangesUnited States
-
Columbia UniversityNational Institute on Aging (NIA)Completed
-
Phoenix VA Health Care SystemCompletedChronic PainUnited States