Evaluation of Project TEAM (Teens Making Environmental and Activity Modifications) (ProjectTEAM)
|The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. Read our disclaimer for details.|
|ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02714868|
Recruitment Status : Completed
First Posted : March 22, 2016
Results First Posted : November 25, 2019
Last Update Posted : November 25, 2019
|Condition or disease||Intervention/treatment||Phase|
|Transition-age Youth Developmental Disabilities Cerebral Palsy Autism Intellectual Disability||Behavioral: Project TEAM Behavioral: Matched Comparison||Not Applicable|
|Study Type :||Interventional (Clinical Trial)|
|Actual Enrollment :||82 participants|
|Intervention Model:||Parallel Assignment|
|Masking:||Single (Outcomes Assessor)|
|Official Title:||Evaluation of Project TEAM (Teens Making Environmental and Activity Modifications) - Effectiveness, Social Validity and Feasibility|
|Actual Study Start Date :||October 2012|
|Actual Primary Completion Date :||September 2016|
|Actual Study Completion Date :||July 31, 2017|
Experimental: Project TEAM Intervention
Project TEAM is a manualized intervention co- facilitated by a disability advocate and a licensed professional. The intervention includes eight group sessions and two experiential learning field trips. In addition, young adults with disabilities serve as peer mentors on field trips and contact youth weekly to support attainment of goals. Project TEAM outcomes are to: increase youths' knowledge of environmental factors and modification strategies; reduce the impact of environmental barriers on participation; increase self-efficacy and self-determination; and increase participation in a personal activity goal in the area of education, employment, or community life.
Behavioral: Project TEAM
Project TEAM is a manualized, group-based intervention designed to be co-facilitated by an experienced leader with a disability (disability advocate) and a licensed service provider (such as an occupational therapist, social worker, or educator). Project TEAM includes eight group sessions and two experiential learning field trips for each participant. Weekly phone calls with peer mentors with disabilities support achievement of each participant's personal activity goal.
Active Comparator: Matched comparison
Youth with disabilities who are matched controls will receive their typical educational or therapeutic services. Youth will receive a stipend to participate in a preferred activity in the community; youth will document what they did and with whom they participated. Attempts to control for the impact of resources on participation and goal achievement.
Behavioral: Matched Comparison
Participants set goal to try a new activity in the community
- Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS) [ Time Frame: 12 weeks following intake (outcome) ]All youth had four goals in the following areas: 1) a participation goal, 2) their ability to identify environmental barriers to their goal, 3) their ability to generate solutions to barriers, and 4) their ability to advocate for needed changes to achieve their goal. Each goal used a five-point goal attainment scale with baseline at -1. Goals levels were created at intake (initial assessment). For the knowledge application goals (goal 2-4), we created standardized goal levels to ensure content validity and reliability within and across youth. Goal attainment for all four goals was rated 12 weeks following intake (outcome) and transformed into a t-score. A t-score of 50 indicates all goals were achieved at the expected level; t-scores greater than 50 indicate individuals exceeded the expected level of goal attainment. Scores range from 0-100 (100 indicates greater than expected goal attainment).
- Project TEAM Knowledge Test [ Time Frame: intake, 12 weeks following intake (outcome), 18 weeks following intake (6 week follow up) ]
Part I: Knowledge of parts of the environment, modification strategies, and the "Game Plan." Higher scores indicate more correct responses.
Part I responses were independently coded as correct/incorrect by the study facilitator and a trained graduate student; discrepancies were resolved by a third scorer (the PI). To establish unidimensionality, we applied a dichotomous Rasch model and removed 24% of the items with Outfit Mean Square >2; values higher than 2 can indicate guessing. The resulting interval sum scores, in logits, were used for analysis; higher logit scores indicate more knowledge (Minimum: -4.05 to maximum 6.69). Higher scores indicate greater problem solving.
- AIR Self-Determination Scale (American Institutes on Research- AIR) [ Time Frame: intake, 12 weeks following intake (outcome), 18 weeks following intake (6 week follow up) ]The AIR measured the capacity and opportunity to act in a self-determined manner at home and school. Parallel youth and parent forms used a 5-point frequency scale (never-always), with higher scores reflecting more self-determination. Reported here are parent self-reported sum scores at outcome. Sum scores range from minimum 18- to maximum 90 (90/higher scores = more self determination)
- Generalized Self Efficacy Scale (GSES) [ Time Frame: intake, 12 weeks following intake (outcome), 18 weeks following intake (6 week follow up) ]We revised a disability self-efficacy scale for this study and created additional questions to assess self-efficacy for addressing environmental barriers. We used a modified three point response scale (Not like me, Sort of like me, Really like me) that incorporated visuals to support comprehension. Higher scores indicated higher self-efficacy. Sum scores range from minimum 11 to maximum 33.
- Participation and Environment Measure for Children and Youth (PEM-CY) [ Time Frame: intake, 12 weeks following intake (outcome) ]Frequency of participation in home, school, and the community. Parent report. We examined change in scores between baseline and outcome only for the context in which the individuals' goal occurred (e.g., for GAS goals regarding going to a concert, the parent only completed "community" at outcome. Higher scores indicate higher frequency of participation. Below, we only report outcomes for the youth with community data at outcome, as it was the most frequently occurring goal context . 0 is do not ever participate, and 7 is participate daily. HIgher scores indicate more frequent participation in the context
- Readiness for Advocacy [ Time Frame: intake, 12 weeks following intake (outcome) ]readiness to engage in advocacy based on transtheoretical model of change. This is a single question with a 5 possible responses (1= minimum, 5= maximum), where higher responses (5) indicate higher readiness for advocacy. Data is reported as increase (improvement in readiness), no change, or decrease (decline in readiness). Improvement is a better outcome. Below, reported for number of participants in each group with improvement between intake and 12 weeks following intake (outcome).
Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT number): NCT02714868
|Principal Investigator:||Jessica Kramer, PhD||Assistant Professor|