A Clinical Trial for Self-Injurious Behavior

NCT ID: NCT03995966

Last Updated: 2025-10-01

Basic Information

• Recruitment Status: ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING
• Clinical Phase: NA
• Total Enrollment: 16 participants
• Study Classification: INTERVENTIONAL
• Study Start Date: 2019-06-04
• Study Completion Date: 2025-12-31

Brief Summary

At least one quarter of the 18 million persons in the US with intellectual and developmental disabilities engage in self-injurious behavior (SIB), which can result in injuries, disfigurement, and loss of function (e.g., blindness). SIB that persists in the absence of social reinforcement has been referred to as automatically maintained SIB (ASIB). Research has shown that the sensitivity of ASIB to disruption by alternative reinforcement is identifiable in a standardized assessment, predicts response to treatment, and provides a quantifiable basis for subtyping ASIB. This research has also identified two subtypes that are highly resistant to behavioral treatment using reinforcement alone, necessitating the use of protective equipment and other procedures to minimize injury. The proposed study is a clinical trial that will allow systematic comparison of the effectiveness of two behavioral treatments targeting treatment-resistant subtypes of ASIB.

Detailed Description

Research shows that automatically maintained self-injurious behavior (ASIB) is comprised of treatment-responsive (Subtype 1) and treatment-resistant subtypes (Subtypes 2 and 3). The primary objective of the clinical trial is to compare two behavioral treatments for the treatment-resistant subtypes of ASIB: Subtypes 2 and 3. Noncontingent Reinforcement (NCR) with competing stimuli (toys that reduce occurrence of SIB) is widely used, but its outcomes are not optimal for most cases with Subtype-2 and -3 ASIB. Noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) includes two phases: 1) Pre-Treatment Assessment to identify competing stimuli and 2) NCR Treatment. Combination Treatment (CT) is based on the same principles as NCR (reinforcer competition), but increases the amount and varies the sources of alternative reinforcement to more effectively reduce ASIB and self-restraint. CT involves the use of competing stimuli, competing tasks (activities that reduce SIB), and self-control training to reduce self-restraint or teach alternative, more adaptive forms of self-control. CT includes three phases: 1) Pre-Treatment Assessments, 2) Intensive Training, and 3) Combination Treatment. Pre-Treatment Assessments will identify competing stimuli, tasks, and self-control equipment; and Intensive Training will strengthen skills needed to fully access available reinforcement to compete with ASIB, and establish self-control skills to replace debilitating self-restraint. Following the Intensive Training phase, CT combines noncontingent access to competing stimuli with differential reinforcement of alternative behavior (DRA) to reinforce engagement with competing tasks, and use of alternative self-control equipment.

Each study participant will be randomly assigned to first receive either NCR or CT using randomly permuted block randomization, stratified by subtype. Each approach includes more than one phase, but both end with a treatment phase. If the first treatment applied is ineffective, based on defined criteria (including the level of improvement and number of treatment sessions), a 3-day washout period will follow where no treatment is applied, and then the second approach will be initiated culminating in the application of that treatment (either NCR or CT).

Following a demonstration of treatment efficacy (for either the first or second treatment that is applied), any additional non-reinforcement treatment components that were added will be withdrawn to determine whether those components remain necessary. If a strong treatment effect does not maintain, the additional components will be reapplied. Treatment generalization will be initiated, and if the effects are maintained the trial will end.

If the first treatment that is applied is effective, that treatment will continue to be applied and generalization will be conducted (and the participant will not crossover to the other treatment approach).

Conditions

Self-Injurious Behavior

Study Design

• Allocation Method: RANDOMIZED
• Intervention Model: CROSSOVER
• Primary Study Purpose: TREATMENT
• Blinding Strategy: SINGLE

Study Groups

Subtype 2 Automatically Maintained SIB

Group Type: ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Noncontingent Reinforcement (NCR)

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

This treatment for ASIB is based on reinforcer competition. Noncontingent Reinforcement (NCR) will consist of first conducting a competing stimulus assessment (CSA) to identify stimuli (toys, massagers, etc.) associated with reductions in ASIB and high levels of engagement. Treatment then involves NCR in which alternative sources of reinforcement are made freely available to compete with reinforcement maintaining ASIB. Providing additional sources of reinforcement is thought to decrease ASIB by producing a shift in the allocation of responding toward accessing the newly available reinforcement. Additional, more restrictive components may be added if the competing stimuli (CS) are ineffective in reducing ASIB. These additional components are applied in accordance to the least-restrictive treatment model and include response blocking, response reduction procedures, protective equipment, or mechanical restraint.

Combination Treatment

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

Combination Treatment is based on the same principles as NCR, but differs in three ways: 1) It includes three pre-treatment assessments that seek to establish competing stimuli, tasks, and self-control equipment through prompting and reinforcement; ; 2) Intensive training in each of these components is conducted to strengthen skills needed to fully access available reinforcement to compete with ASIB; and 3) Combination treatment is assessed, which includes the noncontingent delivery of competing stimuli and differential reinforcement of alternative behavior to reinforce engagement with competing tasks, and use of alternative self-control equipment. This will increase the amount and vary the sources of alternative reinforcement to more effectively reduce ASIB and self-restraint. Restrictive components may be applied as described for the NCR treatment.

Subtype 3 Automatically Maintained SIB

Group Type: ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Noncontingent Reinforcement (NCR)

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

This treatment for ASIB is based on reinforcer competition. Noncontingent Reinforcement (NCR) will consist of first conducting a competing stimulus assessment (CSA) to identify stimuli (toys, massagers, etc.) associated with reductions in ASIB and high levels of engagement. Treatment then involves NCR in which alternative sources of reinforcement are made freely available to compete with reinforcement maintaining ASIB. Providing additional sources of reinforcement is thought to decrease ASIB by producing a shift in the allocation of responding toward accessing the newly available reinforcement. Additional, more restrictive components may be added if the competing stimuli (CS) are ineffective in reducing ASIB. These additional components are applied in accordance to the least-restrictive treatment model and include response blocking, response reduction procedures, protective equipment, or mechanical restraint.

Combination Treatment

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

Combination Treatment is based on the same principles as NCR, but differs in three ways: 1) It includes three pre-treatment assessments that seek to establish competing stimuli, tasks, and self-control equipment through prompting and reinforcement; ; 2) Intensive training in each of these components is conducted to strengthen skills needed to fully access available reinforcement to compete with ASIB; and 3) Combination treatment is assessed, which includes the noncontingent delivery of competing stimuli and differential reinforcement of alternative behavior to reinforce engagement with competing tasks, and use of alternative self-control equipment. This will increase the amount and vary the sources of alternative reinforcement to more effectively reduce ASIB and self-restraint. Restrictive components may be applied as described for the NCR treatment.

Interventions

Noncontingent Reinforcement (NCR)

This treatment for ASIB is based on reinforcer competition. Noncontingent Reinforcement (NCR) will consist of first conducting a competing stimulus assessment (CSA) to identify stimuli (toys, massagers, etc.) associated with reductions in ASIB and high levels of engagement. Treatment then involves NCR in which alternative sources of reinforcement are made freely available to compete with reinforcement maintaining ASIB. Providing additional sources of reinforcement is thought to decrease ASIB by producing a shift in the allocation of responding toward accessing the newly available reinforcement. Additional, more restrictive components may be added if the competing stimuli (CS) are ineffective in reducing ASIB. These additional components are applied in accordance to the least-restrictive treatment model and include response blocking, response reduction procedures, protective equipment, or mechanical restraint.

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

Combination Treatment

Combination Treatment is based on the same principles as NCR, but differs in three ways: 1) It includes three pre-treatment assessments that seek to establish competing stimuli, tasks, and self-control equipment through prompting and reinforcement; ; 2) Intensive training in each of these components is conducted to strengthen skills needed to fully access available reinforcement to compete with ASIB; and 3) Combination treatment is assessed, which includes the noncontingent delivery of competing stimuli and differential reinforcement of alternative behavior to reinforce engagement with competing tasks, and use of alternative self-control equipment. This will increase the amount and vary the sources of alternative reinforcement to more effectively reduce ASIB and self-restraint. Restrictive components may be applied as described for the NCR treatment.

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

• Individuals with intellectual disabilities
• Admitted to the Neurobehavioral Unit Inpatient program at the Kennedy Krieger Institute
• Between the ages of 4 to 25 years
• Exhibits either Subtype 2 or 3 automatically maintained self-injurious behavior

Exclusion Criteria

• Children in foster care
• Non-English speakers
• Individuals with a medical condition that could interfere with participation, or place an individual at increased risk

• Minimum Eligible Age: 4 Years
• Maximum Eligible Age: 25 Years
• Eligible Sex: ALL
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No

Sponsors

Hugo W. Moser Research Institute at Kennedy Krieger, Inc.

OTHER

Sponsor Role: lead

Responsible Party

Louis Hagopian, PhD

Director of the Neurobehavioral Unit, Department of Behavioral Psychology

Responsibility Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

Louis P Hagopian, PhD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Hugo W. Moser Research Institute at Kennedy Krieger, Inc.

Locations

Kennedy Krieger Institute

Baltimore, Maryland, United States

Countries

United States

References

Podlewski J, Opolski M. [Skin carcinoma in a contused head injury treated surgically]. Wiad Lek. 1974 Mar 15;27(6):557-9. No abstract available. Polish.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 4830359 (View on PubMed)

Canal P, Erill S. Effects of calcium dobesilate upon thurfyl nicotinate erythema in man. J Med. 1971;2(6):375-9. No abstract available.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 5292128 (View on PubMed)

Hagopian LP, Frank-Crawford MA. Classification of self-injurious behaviour across the continuum of relative environmental-biological influence. J Intellect Disabil Res. 2018 Dec;62(12):1108-1113. doi: 10.1111/jir.12430. Epub 2017 Oct 13.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 29027294 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

IRB00179539

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id