Autism Spectrum Disorder Clinical Trials

Find Autism Spectrum Disorder Clinical Trials Near You

Motivational Refinements for Facilitating Reinforcement Schedule Thinning

Status: Recruiting
Location: See all (2) locations...
Intervention Type: Behavioral
Study Type: Interventional
Study Phase: Not Applicable
SUMMARY

Destructive behavior represents a comorbid condition of developmental disability for which risk increases with intellectual disability severity, communication deficits, and co-occurring autism spectrum disorder. Destructive behavior, such as self-injurious behavior and aggression, causes harm to the child and others and increases the risk for institutionalization, social isolation, physical restraint, medication overuse, and abuse. Clinicians have used functional analyses to identify the variables that reinforce destructive behavior and to develop effective, function-based treatments. Functional communication training (FCT) is an empirically supported, function-based treatment that decreases destructive behavior. Using FCT, the clinician teaches the child to use a functional communication response (FCR) to request the reinforcer maintaining destructive behavior, while placing destructive behavior on extinction. For example, if functional analysis results showed that attention reinforced destructive behavior, the clinician would provide attention when the child used the FCR (Play with me, please) and would not provide attention for destructive behavior. Two limitations of FCT are that (a) schedules of reinforcement maintaining the FCR must often be thinned gradually to levels that are practical for caregivers to implement consistently in the home and in the community, and (b) this necessary process of reinforcement schedule thinning regularly causes destructive behavior to increase following initially effective treatment, a form of treatment relapse called resurgence. The current project aims to improve these limitations of FCT by (a) hastening the process of reinforcement schedule thinning by removing unnecessary schedule-thinning steps using the results of a progressive interval assessment and (b) mitigating the resurgence of destructive behavior by providing stimuli that highly compete with the reinforcer maintaining destructive behavior. The investigators will conduct a randomized clinical trial to evaluate the extent to which these two promising refinements to FCT improve the process of reinforcement schedule thinning, and an exploratory experiment will examine the interactive effects of these two approaches. This novel project has the potential to substantially improve standards of care guiding the treatment of severe destructive behavior and to improve the long-term outcomes for children and families afflicted by these debilitating behavior disorders.

Eligibility
Participation Requirements
Sex: All
Minimum Age: 3
Maximum Age: 17
Healthy Volunteers: t
View:

• boys and girls from ages 3 to 17

• destructive behavior that occurs at least 10 times a day, despite previous treatment

• destructive behavior reinforced by social consequences

• stable protective supports for self-injurious behavior (e.g., helmet) with no anticipated changes during enrollment

• on a stable psychoactive drug regimen for at least 10 half-lives per drug or drug free

• stable educational plan and placement with no anticipated changes during the child's treatment

Locations
United States
New Jersey
Douglass Developmental Disabilities Center
RECRUITING
New Brunswick
Rutgers University Center for Autism Research, Education, and Services
RECRUITING
Somerset
Contact Information
Primary
Brian D Greer, Ph.D.
brian.greer@rutgers.edu
8488008505
Backup
Daniel R Mitteer, Ph.D.
daniel.mitteer@rutgers.edu
8488008506
Time Frame
Start Date: 2023-10-24
Estimated Completion Date: 2028-08-31
Participants
Target number of participants: 30
Treatments
Experimental: Evaluation of PIA-Informed Schedule Thinning
The goal of Arm 1 will be to will extend pilot work on the utility of individualizing the starting point for reinforcement schedule thinning based on the results of a progressive-interval assessement (PIA). The investigators will do so by conducting reinforcement schedule thinning using a multielement design in two separate contexts, one informed by the results of a PIA and another not so informed. The criteria for schedule thinning will be identical across both conditions but will be applied to each condition independently. Investigators will determine the efficiency of schedule thinning, reductions of destructive behavior, and durability of functional communication responses across the two conditions.
Experimental: Evaluation of Competing Items
The goal of Arm 2 will be to evaluate the utility of competing items (e.g., alternative reinforcement or activities) during schedule thinning. Both conditions will be informed by the PIA, similar to the experimental condition in Arm 1. PIA-informed schedule thinning with competing stimuli will be identical to that of PIA-informed schedule thinning, except (a) the therapist will provide continuous access to the highly competing stimulus identified by that participant's competing stimulus assessment (e.g., providing attention while an iPad is unavailable, playing music while working), and (b) it will occur in the other context (e.g., the yellow context). Investigators will determine the efficiency of schedule thinning, reductions of destructive behavior, the durability of functional communication responses across the two conditions, and resurgence of destructive behavior during prolonged periods of extinction.
Experimental: Effects of Competing Items on PIA Outcomes
The goal of Arm 3 will be to examine potential interaction effects between the above two experimental arms by conducting PIAs with no, low, moderate, and high competing stimuli to determine the schedule duration at which schedule thinning should commence with each competing stimulus. All participants will complete this arm prior to enrollment in Arms 1 or 2. The investigators will randomize the sequence of each of the four PIAs (PIA with no competing stimuli, PIA with low competing stimuli, PIA with moderately competing stimuli, PIA with highly competing stimuli) across participants.
Related Therapeutic Areas
Sponsors
Leads: Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey

This content was sourced from clinicaltrials.gov