Evaluating the Practice Resource for Driving After Stroke

NCT06303765 | Recruiting

• 1 other identifier: 13Nov2023PReDAS Study
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 8
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

After stroke, individuals must be assessed to determine if they can resume driving. Return to driving is very important to people who have experienced a stroke. Unfortunately, health care providers face challenges in addressing driving after stroke. Common issues include being unsure of the best screening practices, difficulty discussing driving with patients, and challenges making informed recommendations about driving that balance the risk of public safety along with supporting patient goals. Occupational Therapists (OTs) are health care providers that provide screening, assessment, and intervention for driving to individuals who have had a stroke. OTs working in stroke care have highlighted the urgency for evidence-based resources to support practice to address driving with patients. The Practice Resource for Driving After Stroke (PReDAS), is an evidenced-based resource to support the clinical practice of OTs in addressing driving in acute stroke settings. A previous pilot study has demonstrated that the PReDAS is considered useful by both health care providers and patients. Further study is needed to evaluate how the PReDAS can support OTs in addressing driving with patients. The current study proposes to provide the PReDAS as an intervention to OTs working in acute stroke settings to see if the intervention increases OT's self efficacy and clinical reasoning for addressing driving. The study will take repeated measures of self-efficacy and clinical reasoning among participating OTs to determine if the PReDAS intervention supports improved self-efficacy and clinical reasoning.

Conditions

Stroke, Acute; Driving; Occupational Therapy

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (2)

• clinical reasoning

  Measured via the Self-Assessment of Clinical Reasoning and Reflection. Min score=26, max score=130, higher scores= better clinical reasoning

  collected at enrollment and end of month 1,2,3,4,5 and 6

• self-efficacy

  measured via the Personal Efficacy and Beliefs Scale. min score=10, max=60. higher scores= better self efficacy

  collected at enrollment and end of month 1,2,3,4,5 and 6

Study Arms (1)

PReDAS intervention

EXPERIMENTAL

All participants will receive the PReDAS intervention during the study. As per concurrent multiple baseline designs, each participant will be randomized as to WHEN they receive the PReDAS during the 6 month study period. Baseline lengths will vary from 2 to 5 months.

Other: Practice Resource for Driving After Stroke (PReDAS)

Interventions

Practice Resource for Driving After Stroke (PReDAS) OTHER

1. Provision of written copy of PReDAS for occupational therapist to review 2. 1:1 online training session to use the PReDAS (1 hour in length)

PReDAS intervention

Eligibility Criteria

• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: No
• Age Groups: Child (0-17), Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

• Practicing Occupational therapist
• current employment on an acute stroke unit

You may not qualify if:

• there is already a participant enrolled who is located on the same stroke unit
• the person already has reviewed a copy of the PReDAS

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Western University, Canada: lead

Study Sites (1)

Western University

London, Ontario, N6G 1H1, Canada

RECRUITING

Related Publications (23)

• Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators. (2020). Determining Driver Fitness in Canada: Part 1 A Model for the Administration of Driver Fitness Programs and Part 2: CCMTA Medical Standards for Drivers. https://ccmta.ca/ images/CCMTAMedicalStandardsDec12015finalcleancopyJune20016 edit.bookmarkspdf.pdf

  BACKGROUND

• Liddle, J., Turpin, M., McKenna, K., Kubus, T., Lambley, S., & McCaffrey, K. (2009). The experiences and needs of people who cease driving after stroke. Brain Impairment, 10(3), 271-281. https://doi.org/10.1375/brim.10.3.271

  BACKGROUND

• Patomella AH, Johansson K, Tham K. Lived experience of driving ability following stroke. Disabil Rehabil. 2009;31(9):726-33. doi: 10.1080/09638280802306539.

  PMID: 18946806 BACKGROUND

• Vander Veen A, Laliberte Rudman D. Rethinking Driving Against Medical Advice: The Situated Nature of Driving After Stroke. Can J Occup Ther. 2022 Dec;89(4):406-416. doi: 10.1177/00084174221114670. Epub 2022 Jul 19.

  PMID: 35854415 BACKGROUND

• Korner-Bitensky N, Menon A, von Zweck C, Van Benthem K. Occupational therapists' capacity-building needs related to older driver screening, assessment, and intervention: a Canadawide survey. Am J Occup Ther. 2010 Mar-Apr;64(2):316-24. doi: 10.5014/ajot.64.2.316.

  PMID: 20437919 BACKGROUND

• Sangrar, R., Griffith, L. E., Letts, L., & Vrkljan, B. (2018). Examining Occupational Therapists' Awareness of Medical Fitness-to-Drive Legislation Using a Knowledge-to-Action Approach. Topics in Geriatric Rehabilitation, 34(4), 274-282. https://doi.org/10.1097/TGR.0000000000000205

  BACKGROUND

• Cammarata, M., Mueller, A. S., Harris, J., & Vrkljan, B. (2017). The Role of the Occupational Therapist in Driver Rehabilitation After Stroke. Physical and Occupational Therapy in Geriatrics, 35(1), 20-33. https://doi.org/10.1080/02703181.2016.1277443

  BACKGROUND

• Vander Veen A, Cammarata M, Renner S, Alvarez L. The Clinical Usefulness of the Practice Resource for Driving after Stroke (PReDAS). Occup Ther Health Care. 2023 Jan;37(1):119-144. doi: 10.1080/07380577.2021.2018751. Epub 2021 Dec 26.

  PMID: 34955088 BACKGROUND

• Mountain A, Patrice Lindsay M, Teasell R, Salbach NM, de Jong A, Foley N, Bhogal S, Bains N, Bowes R, Cheung D, Corriveau H, Joseph L, Lesko D, Millar A, Parappilly B, Pikula A, Scarfone D, Rochette A, Taylor T, Vallentin T, Dowlatshahi D, Gubitz G, Casaubon LK, Cameron JI. Canadian Stroke Best Practice Recommendations: Rehabilitation, Recovery, and Community Participation following Stroke. Part Two: Transitions and Community Participation Following Stroke. Int J Stroke. 2020 Oct;15(7):789-806. doi: 10.1177/1747493019897847. Epub 2020 Jan 27.

  PMID: 31983292 BACKGROUND

• Bandura, A. (1997). Self efficacy: The exercise of control. Freeman.

  BACKGROUND

• Simmons B. Clinical reasoning: concept analysis. J Adv Nurs. 2010 May;66(5):1151-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2010.05262.x. Epub 2010 Mar 9.

  PMID: 20337790 BACKGROUND

• Ledford, J. R., & Gast, D. L. (2018). Single Case Research Methodology: Applications in Special Education and Behavioural Sciences. Routledge.

  BACKGROUND

• Murray A, Di Tommaso A, Molineux M, Young A, Power P. Contemporary occupational therapy philosophy and practice in hospital settings. Scand J Occup Ther. 2021 Apr;28(3):213-224. doi: 10.1080/11038128.2020.1750691. Epub 2020 May 1.

  PMID: 32356478 BACKGROUND

• Vander Veen A, Holmes J, Tucker P, Alvarez L. Addressing Driving in Acute Care: Perceived Relevance and Competence. Can J Occup Ther. 2024 Mar;91(1):88-99. doi: 10.1177/00084174231182898. Epub 2023 Jun 22.

  PMID: 37350112 BACKGROUND

• Riggs, M. L., Warka, J., Babasa, B., Betancourt, R., & Hooker, S. (1994). Development and Validation of Self-Efficacy and Outcome Expectancy Scales for Job-Related Applications. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54(3), 793-802.

  BACKGROUND

• O'Brien, K. M., Kearney, M. S., & Sauber, E. (2019). Measuring career and occupational self-efficacy. In M. W. Gallagher & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Positive psychological assessment: A handbook of models and measures (2nd ed.). (2nd ed., pp. 97-110). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000138-007

  BACKGROUND

• Peterson, J., McGillis Hall, L., O'Brien-Pallas, L., & Cockerill, R. (2011). Job satisfaction and intentions to leave of new nurses. Journal of Research in Nursing, 16(6), 536-548. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987111422423

  BACKGROUND

• Royeen, C., Mu, K., Barnett, K., & Luebbeb, A. (2000). Pilot Investigtion: Evaluation of Clinical Refelction and Reasoning. In P. A. H. Crist (Ed.), Innovations in Occupational therapy education (pp. 107-115). American Occupational Therapy Association.

  BACKGROUND

• Tate. (2018). Multiple-Baseline Designs. In R. Tate & M. Perdices (Eds.), Single-Case Experimental Designs for Clinical Research and Neurorehabilitation Settings (1st ed., pp. 108-130). Routledge. https://doi-org.proxy1.lib.uwo.ca/10.4324/9780429488184

  BACKGROUND

• Barton, E. E., Lloyd, B. P., Spriggs, A. D., & Gast, D. L. (2018). Visual analysis of graphic data. In J. R. Ledford & D. L. Gast (Eds.), Single Case Research Methodology: Applications in Special Education and Behavioral Sciences (3rd ed., pp. 179-214). https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203521892

  BACKGROUND

• Fingerhut, J., Xu, X., & Moeyaert, M. (2021). Selecting the proper Tau-U measure for single-case experimental designs: Development and application of a decision flowchart. Evidence-Based Communication Assessment and Intervention, 15(3), 99-114. https://doi.org/10.1080/17489539.2021.1937851

  BACKGROUND

• Parker RI, Vannest KJ, Davis JL, Sauber SB. Combining nonoverlap and trend for single-case research: Tau-U. Behav Ther. 2011 Jun;42(2):284-99. doi: 10.1016/j.beth.2010.08.006. Epub 2011 Feb 3.

  PMID: 21496513 BACKGROUND

• Vannest, K. J., & Ninci, J. (2015). Evaluating intervention effects in single-case research designs. Journal of Counseling and Development, 93(4), 403-411. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcad.12038

  BACKGROUND

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Stroke

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Cerebrovascular Disorders; Brain Diseases; Central Nervous System Diseases; Nervous System Diseases; Vascular Diseases; Cardiovascular Diseases

Study Officials

• Liliana Alvarez, PhD

  Western University

  PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Central Study Contacts

April Vander Veen, PhD(c)

CONTACT

519 400 4748; afrankr2@uwo.ca

Liliana Alvarez, PhD

CONTACT

lalvare2@uwo.ca

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: NA
• Masking: NONE
• Purpose: TREATMENT
• Intervention Model: SINGLE GROUP
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
• PI Title: Assistant Professor

Model Details: multiple baseline study

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: March 4, 2024
• First Posted: March 12, 2024
• Study Start: February 1, 2024
• Primary Completion: July 1, 2024
• Study Completion: August 31, 2024
• Last Updated: April 9, 2024

Record last verified: 2024-04

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will not share

Locations

CA (1)