Learning Effective New Strategies for Worry in Parkinson's Disease
LENS-PD
1 other identifier
interventional
60
1 country
1
Brief Summary
High rates of anxiety and worry has been observed in people with Parkinson's (PwP). Previous research outside of PwP has shown that individuals with anxiety have a habit of interpreting ambiguous information in a negative manner (i.e., interpretation bias), and that it is possible to encourage a more positive interpretation bias through an online training. In the current study, the aim is to test the acceptability and feasibility of an online training program that aims to encourage more positive interpretation bias in high worrying PwP. Participants complete an online baseline assessment, and are then invited to complete ten training sessions over a period of three weeks followed by another assessment and follow-up assessments (at 1 month \& 3 months). Participants are randomized into either the active condition or control condition. Across both conditions, participants will listen to short, everyday scenarios which are ambiguous (could end positively or negatively). In the active condition, a positive ending is given in half of the scenarios. In the other half, participants are instructed to imagine positive endings to ambiguous scenarios. In the control condition, all scenarios end ambiguously and no instructions are given about imagining positive endings. The primary aim of the study is to test the acceptability and feasibility of the online training platform. Participants will complete a feasibility interview after completing the training. Specifically, the acceptability of the following will be tested: i) the online nature of the training (and lack of face-to-face contact); ii) being randomised into one of the two conditions; iii) the number and duration of the assignments; and iv) the text messages/e-mail/phone call reminders to complete the assignments. The feasibility of the online training platform will be judged on the i) rate of recruitment; ii) retention rates during the training; iii) adherence to the study (i.e., number of assignments completed); iv) retention rates at follow-up. The secondary aim is to estimate the effect size of the active condition (vs. control; on worry scores post-training, and at follow-ups) to inform power analyses for a future randomised control trial. It is hypothesised that the training will be acceptable and feasible in a high worrying PwP sample. It is also hypothesised that the training will be effective in reducing worry and improving interpretation bias.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P50-P75 for not_applicable parkinson-disease
Started Jul 2019
Shorter than P25 for not_applicable parkinson-disease
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
First Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
June 24, 2019
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
July 5, 2019
CompletedStudy Start
First participant enrolled
July 15, 2019
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
March 31, 2020
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
March 31, 2020
CompletedOctober 31, 2019
October 1, 2019
9 months
June 24, 2019
October 30, 2019
Conditions
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (11)
Acceptability; rating of online training
Whether participants accept the online nature of the training (extent of positive feedback compared to negative feedback)
At approximately 4 weeks (during the feasibility interview)
Acceptability; lack of face-to-face contact
Whether participants accept the lack of face-to-face contact
At approximately 4 weeks (during the feasibility interview)
Acceptability; number of assignments
Whether participants accept the number of assignments
At approximately 4 weeks (during the feasibility interview)
Acceptability; duration of assignments
Whether participants accept the duration of assignments
At approximately 4 weeks (during the feasibility interview)
Acceptability; reminders
Whether participants accept the text messages/e-mail/phone call reminders
At approximately 4 weeks (during the feasibility interview)
Acceptability; randomisation
Proportion of eligible participants who agree to being randomised to those who do not agree
Participants are asked during the eligibility call prior to starting the training if they are happy to be randomised. As such, acceptability to be randomised is at baseline.
Training feasibility; rate of recruitment
The feasibility of the training based on the rate of recruitment
From recruitment start (moment when Parkinson's UK [United Kingdom] advertise the study) till study close (either end of November, 2019, or when the recruitment target is met; approximately 5 months)
Training feasibility; retention rates
The feasibility of the training based on the retention rates during the training
Duration of study (approximately 5 months)
Training feasibility; study adherence
The feasibility of the training based on the adherence to the study (number of assignments completed)
Assignments are completed over three weeks, with a possibility of a one week extension for those who have not completed at least 8 in the three weeks.
Training feasibility; retention at one-month follow-up
The feasibility of the training based on the retention rates at follow-up (i.e., number of missing cases or drop outs at the one month follow-up)
Duration of study (approximately 5 months)
Training feasibility; retention at three-month follow-up
The feasibility of the training based on the retention rates at follow-up (i.e., number of missing cases or drop outs at the three month follow-up)
Duration of study (approximately 5 months)
Secondary Outcomes (3)
Decrease in worry (estimation of effect size); post-training
Baseline worry scores will be compared to worry scores after the training (assessment 2; completed approximately 3 weeks later)
Decrease in worry (estimation of effect size); at one-month follow-up
Baseline worry scores will be compared to worry scores at the one-month follow-up
Decrease in worry (estimation of effect size); at three-months follow-up
Baseline worry scores will be compared to worry scores at the three-months follow-up
Other Outcomes (2)
Improvement in interpretation bias (scrambled sentences task)
Comparing baseline scores to post-training (assessment 2; completed approximately 3 weeks later) scores
Improvement in interpretation bias (recognition test)
Comparing baseline scores to post-training (assessment 2; completed approximately 3 weeks later) scores
Study Arms (2)
Active
EXPERIMENTALControl
SHAM COMPARATORInterventions
Active: 50% positive endings to scenarios, 50% generation of positive endings to ambiguous scenarios Control: 100% ambiguous endings to scenarios with no instructions to imagine positive endings
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Diagnosed with idiopathic Parkinson's Disease
- can use a computer independently
- have (correct to) normal hearing
- scores above 62 on the Penn State Worry Questionnaire
You may not qualify if:
- Those who have previously taken part in lab-based studies at King's College London where measures of interpretation bias were included.
- Currently or have recently (past six months) received psychological treatment.
- If participants are currently taking anti-depressants or anti-anxiety medication, they need to have been stable on the same dose for at least six weeks.
- Participants who score 2 or higher on the ninth item of the Patient Health Questionnaire-- (measuring suicidal ideation) at screening will be excluded.
- If individuals do not have regular access to a computer and/or the internet, they will be excluded.
- Those who can not concentrated on the questions asked during the Modified Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status, or are confused by the questions asked.
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
King's College London
London, SE5 8AF, United Kingdom
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- DOUBLE
- Who Masked
- PARTICIPANT, OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
- Purpose
- OTHER
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
- PI Title
- Research associate
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
June 24, 2019
First Posted
July 5, 2019
Study Start
July 15, 2019
Primary Completion
March 31, 2020
Study Completion
March 31, 2020
Last Updated
October 31, 2019
Record last verified: 2019-10
Data Sharing
- IPD Sharing
- Will not share
Given the small sample size and specific characteristics of the sample - there is increased likeliness of identifying someone who took part. Other researchers can request data - this will be reviewed by the team per request to ensure there is no possibility to identify any individuals.