A Randomized Trial of Interventions for Teenage Drivers With Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)

Not Applicable

Completed

Conditions: Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

Interventions: Device: CarChipPro
Behavioral: Driver's Education
Behavioral: STEER Program
Other: Driving Simulator Practice

Registration Number: NCT01322646

Lead Sponsor: State University of New York at Buffalo

Brief Summary: There is clear, converging evidence from multiple prospective studies with well-diagnosed adolescents with ADHD and comparison, non-ADHD adolescents, that teen drivers with ADHD have more accidents and other adverse driving outcomes. Available research indicates parental monitoring and limit-setting for adolescent drivers is one of the most effective interventions for preventing negative driving outcomes. For children with ADHD, interventions to promote parenting capacity to effectively oversee and intervene in teen driving will likely need to be intensive and require multiple treatment components. The present proposal aims to compare the standard care for teen drivers (driver's education classes and driving practice) to the Supporting a Teen's Effective Entry to the Roadway (STEER) program, that includes a parent-teen intervention, adolescent skill building, parent training on effective adolescent management strategies, joint parent-teen negotiations sessions, practice on a driving simulator, parental monitoring of objective driving behaviors, and the targeting of safe teen driving via contingency management strategies (i.e., parent-teen contracts). To facilitate teen and parent engagement the intervention will be preceded by a motivational interview. The specific aims of the proposal are to investigate the efficacy of the STEER program relative to a standard care group in a randomized clinical trial (N=172) on measures of objective driving outcome and parenting capacity. It is hypothesized that the STEER program will result in improved outcomes relative to the standard care group at the end of intervention and 6 and 12 month follow-up assessments.

Detailed Description: Not available

Recruitment & Eligibility

Status: COMPLETED

Sex: All

Target Recruitment: 172

Inclusion Criteria

Clinical Diagnosis of ADHD, Combined Type
At least 16 years old
Has a driving Permit

Exclusion Criteria

No parent willing to be involved
Seizure disorder, eating disorder, psychotic disorder, current diagnosis of substance/alcohol dependence
Prior Driver's education class

Study & Design

Study Type: INTERVENTIONAL

Study Design: PARALLEL

Arm && Interventions

Group	Intervention	Description
Driver Training	Driver's Education	Driver Education Program Practice driving on a driving simulator Provision of the CarChipPro to the family
STEER Program	Driving Simulator Practice	Driver Education STEER Program
Driver Training	Driving Simulator Practice	Driver Education Program Practice driving on a driving simulator Provision of the CarChipPro to the family
STEER Program	Driver's Education	Driver Education STEER Program
STEER Program	CarChipPro	Driver Education STEER Program
Driver Training	CarChipPro	Driver Education Program Practice driving on a driving simulator Provision of the CarChipPro to the family
STEER Program	STEER Program	Driver Education STEER Program

Primary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Number of Risky Driving Events Assessed by On-Board Driving Monitor	Follow up period after the intervention (1 year)	Frequency count of risky driving events (e.g., abrupt braking, hard acceleration, abrupt swerving) recorded by engine performance monitor installed in the car. Events were counted and a greater frequency indicated more risky driving. The average number of risky driving events, collected over a four-week period at each assessment point were used as the dependent measure.
Positive Parenting Observational Data	Follow-up period after the intervention (12 weeks)	Parents and teens discussed two recent issues and these discussions were coded using The Interaction Behavior Code (IBC). The IBC is a behavioral coding system designed to assess global impressions of parent-adolescent problem-solving and communication behavior. Coders were undergraduates who were unaware of both study hypothesis and group assignment. Coders were instructed to rate 32 behavioral items related to positive and negative parenting in terms of their presence or absence of the behaviors (Items 1-22) or the how often specific parenting behaviors occurred for Items 23-32 ("no" = 0 points, "a little" = .5 point, and "alot" = 1 point). Coders scores were summed across the 32 items and scores fore each scale could range from 0-32. Thus for the positive parenting scale, higher scores, ranging from 0-32, indicated improvement.

Secondary Outcome Measures