ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT02153736SPEEDIUpdated Jan 29, 2018Results posted

Initial Efficacy Study of Supporting Play, Exploration, & Early Development Intervention

An interventional study of SPEEDI Intervention in Infant, Premature, Diseases and Brain White Matter Disease Periventricular, sponsored by Virginia Commonwealth University. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged Up to 18 Weeks. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2018-01-29.

Sponsored by Virginia Commonwealth University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Help build ClinicalTrials.gg — short surveys, remote interviews or testing, in your language. Take part →

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
14
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
Up to 18 Weeks
Sex
All
01

Where this study stands

Counted across the records on this site · 2026-11-14

Among 22 studies in Infant, Premature, Diseases with a site in United States — 4 open to participants now, 5 under way, none of them phase 3. Infant, Premature, Diseases · United States.

Enrollment
14th of 16
14 · median 58
Started
2014
with 2 others
No phase
12 of 22
4 open now
Registered
8th of 22
by date

Among the 22 studies in Infant, Premature, Diseases with a site in United States, this one is the 14th largest by enrollment of the 16 interventional ones that give a count, is one of 3 that started in 2014, is one of 12 with no phase, and was the 8th registered.

Infant, Premature, Diseases

88 studies on the registry are indexed under Infant, Premature, Diseases; 11 are open to participants now.

Browse Infant, Premature, Diseases studies →

Open to participants now

4 of the 22 studies in Infant, Premature, Diseases with a site in United States are open now. Recruiting first, the newest first:

All 4 open studies →

A study can be open while its sites in United States have not opened yet or have stopped. Only those recruiting at a site in United States →

Who these studies take

Of the 6 Infant, Premature, Diseases studies recruiting now, 1 sets no upper age limit and 5 stop at 75 or younger; 6 take children under 18; none take healthy volunteers.

This study: Up to 18 Weeks · all sexes · no healthy volunteers.

The full table on the hub →

This tab as a report to print or save as PDF → With an account.

Was this useful?
Watch this landscapeDownload CSVNarrow it in search →With an account: a weekly mail of what changed among 22 studies in Infant, Premature, Diseases with a site in United States, or all of them as a file.
02

Study summary

The primary aims of this randomized controlled trial are to evaluate efficacy potential of SPEEDI at enhancing reaching and play based problem solving compared to infants receiving usual care.

Read the detailed description

The primary aims of this randomized controlled trial are to evaluate efficacy potential of SPEEDI at enhancing reaching and play based problem solving compared to infants receiving usual care. The secondary aim is to assess the efficacy potential of SPEEDI to impact motor and cognitive development as assessed using commonly used clinical outcome measures. The exploratory aims are to assess the impact of SPEEDI on parent child interactions and feeding skills. The findings will provide crucial initial efficacy estimates to be used in a larger definitive clinical trial of SPEEDI.

03

Conditions studied

  • Infant, Premature, Diseases
  • Brain White Matter Disease Periventricular
04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
Up to 18 Weeks
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • born extremely preterm (˂29 weeks of gestation) OR 10 born preterm and diagnosed with a neonatal brain injury including intraventricular hemorrhage grade 3 or 4, periventricular white matter injury, or hydrocephalus requiring a shunt.
  • Medically stable by 40 weeks of gestation, including being off ventilator support
  • Live within 50 minutes of the hospital.
  • English Speaking mother
  • Mother willing and able to participate in the study with the infant subject

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Genetic syndromes or musculoskeletal deformities
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
14 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • No intervention
    Usual Care Group

    This group of subjects will receive usual care provided in the medial system and community.

  • Experimental
    SPEEDI Intervention

    This group will receive and parent and physical therapy provided intervention to increase the infants opportunities for play which will enhance development.

    Behavioral: SPEEDI Intervention

Interventions

  • BehavioralSPEEDI Intervention

    Behavioral intervention provided through a collaboration between the mother of enrolled subjects and a physical therapist. Intervention starts in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit and continues after discharge. SPEEDI includes both parent education and developmental activities.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Reaching (Toy Contact Duration)

    Duration the infant is in contact with the target is used to quantify changes in reaching.

    Time frame: 1 month post intervention

  2. Early Problem Solving Indicator (EPSI)

    Problem-solving behaviors were assessed using the Early Problem Solving Indicator (EPSI). The EPSI is the cognitive subtest of the Individual Growth and Development Indicators designed to measure infant and toddler play-based problem-solving through 36 months of age. It defines problem-solving as consisting of visual exploration, object manipulation and memory. The infant was video-recorded interacting with 3 standard toys: pop-up animals toy, 6 seriated, plastic cups, and a gum ball machine with 5 balls. Infants were given each toy for 2 minutes. The frequency of 4 mutually exclusive behaviors (look, explore, function, solution) were coded using definitions from the EPSI protocol. time. The total number of problem solving behaviors was calculated as a sum of look, explore, function, and solution for each infant at each visit and reported as the total EPSI frequency with a higher frequency reflecting more problem solving behaviors.

    Time frame: End of intervention, 1 and 3 months post intervention

Secondary outcomes

  1. Early Feeding Skill Assessment (FES)

    The Early Feeding Skills (EFS) was used to assess the infant's oral feeding skills during the video recorded feeding described above. The EFS is a 26-item observational tool that can be used from the start of oral feeding through the maturation of feeding skills. Each item can score 1-3 with one representing the least skill or high frequency of problem (an area of clinical concern), and three representing mature skill or absence of problem (area of strength). Subscales included were ability to maintain engagement in feeding, ability to organize oral-motor functioning, ability to coordinate swallowing, and ability to maintain physiological stability. The sum of all the items in a subscale divided by the number of items in the subscale gives the subscale score of 1-3. The sum of all subscales was used to create an EFS total score which could range from 2 to 12 with a higher score reflecting a better feeding performance.

    Time frame: Baseline, End phase 1, End of intervention, 1 and 3 months post intervention

  2. Parent Child Early Relational Assessment (PCERA)

    The Parent-Child Early Relational Assessment (PCERA; Clark, 2010; Clark, 1999) was designed to assess mother-infant interaction. In this study PCERA was scored from a video of the feeding interaction. The PCERA is a 65-item observational rating scale (29 parental, 27 infant, and 8 dyadic), designed to assess the amount, duration, and intensity of interaction. Each item was rated on a 3-point ordinal scale with 1-2 indicating an area of concern, 3 indicating an area for some concern and 4- 5 indicating an area of strength. Eight subscales constructed from items of the PCERA have been theoretically derived and confirmed by factor analysis (Clark, 1999; Clark et al., 1997). For ease of analysis this scale was transformed to a -1 to +1 range. Scores were recorded as 1 or 2 = -1, 3= 0, 4 or 5 = 1. The total PCERA score is the mean of all the subscale mean scores and ranged -1 (highest risk of atypical interactions) to +1 (most positive interactions).

    Time frame: Baseline, End phase 1, End of intervention, 1 month post intervention

  3. Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development (Bayley).

    The Bayley-III is a norm references standardized developmental assessment of Motor, Cognitive, and Language skills. Composite scores for each domain have a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15. A score of 85-115 is considered average. Higher composite scores represent higher or better performance on that subtest. The Bayley was administered at the final follow-up visit and 3 months after the intervention ended.

    Time frame: 3 month post intervention

  4. Test of Infant Motor Performance (TIMP)

    The TIMP is a standardized and norm references test of motor control and posture in infants 4 months of age and younger which is commonly used with infants starting at 34 weeks of post-menstrual age. Change in raw score from baseline to end of the intervention is reported. The TIMP raw score ranges from 0 to 142. A higher score represented greater performance in motor control and posture.

    Time frame: Baseline to End of intervention

07

Results

Posted Sep 18, 2017
Limitations and caveats
Sample smaller than anticipated Fewer infant with brain injury than anticipated ceiling effect notes with reaching measures longer term outcomes only possible from clinical records

Participant flow

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneUsual Care GroupSPEEDI Intervention
Started77
Completed55
Not completed22
Withdrew: Lost to follow-up10
Withdrew: Medical status change made ineligible10
Withdrew: Death01
Withdrew: Withdrawal by subject01

Outcome measures

PrimaryReaching (Toy Contact Duration)

Duration the infant is in contact with the target is used to quantify changes in reaching.

Time frame:
1 month post intervention
Reported as:
Mean · Seconds
Reaching (Toy Contact Duration)
SecondsUsual Care GroupSPEEDI Intervention
Reaching (Toy Contact Duration)20.2 ± 21.4528.02 ± 16.30
PrimaryEarly Problem Solving Indicator (EPSI)

Problem-solving behaviors were assessed using the Early Problem Solving Indicator (EPSI). The EPSI is the cognitive subtest of the Individual Growth and Development Indicators designed to measure infant and toddler play-based problem-solving through 36 months of age. It defines problem-solving as consisting of visual exploration, object manipulation and memory. The infant was video-recorded interacting with 3 standard toys: pop-up animals toy, 6 seriated, plastic cups, and a gum ball machine with 5 balls. Infants were given each toy for 2 minutes. The frequency of 4 mutually exclusive behaviors (look, explore, function, solution) were coded using definitions from the EPSI protocol. time. The total number of problem solving behaviors was calculated as a sum of look, explore, function, and solution for each infant at each visit and reported as the total EPSI frequency with a higher frequency reflecting more problem solving behaviors.

Time frame:
End of intervention, 1 and 3 months post intervention
Reported as:
Mean · # of Problem Solving Behaviors in 6 min
Early Problem Solving Indicator (EPSI)
# of Problem Solving Behaviors in 6 minUsual Care GroupSPEEDI Intervention
End of intervention58.00 ± 39.59103.2 ± 28.89
1 months post intervention95.2 ± 52.95131.80 ± 61.44
3 months post intervention146 ± 86.17212 ± 54.98
SecondaryEarly Feeding Skill Assessment (FES)

The Early Feeding Skills (EFS) was used to assess the infant's oral feeding skills during the video recorded feeding described above. The EFS is a 26-item observational tool that can be used from the start of oral feeding through the maturation of feeding skills. Each item can score 1-3 with one representing the least skill or high frequency of problem (an area of clinical concern), and three representing mature skill or absence of problem (area of strength). Subscales included were ability to maintain engagement in feeding, ability to organize oral-motor functioning, ability to coordinate swallowing, and ability to maintain physiological stability. The sum of all the items in a subscale divided by the number of items in the subscale gives the subscale score of 1-3. The sum of all subscales was used to create an EFS total score which could range from 2 to 12 with a higher score reflecting a better feeding performance.

Time frame:
Baseline, End phase 1, End of intervention, 1 and 3 months post intervention
Reported as:
Mean · EFS Total score
Early Feeding Skill Assessment (FES)
EFS Total scoreUsual Care GroupSPEEDI Intervention
Baseline8.32 ± .488.61 ± 1.44
End phase 18.27 ± 1.278.82 ± 1.58
End of intervention Phase 28.00 ± 0.449.65 ± 1.17
1 month post intervention10.10 ± 1.369.91 ± 1.12
3 months post intervention10.00 ± 1.4210.40 ± 1.57
SecondaryParent Child Early Relational Assessment (PCERA)

The Parent-Child Early Relational Assessment (PCERA; Clark, 2010; Clark, 1999) was designed to assess mother-infant interaction. In this study PCERA was scored from a video of the feeding interaction. The PCERA is a 65-item observational rating scale (29 parental, 27 infant, and 8 dyadic), designed to assess the amount, duration, and intensity of interaction. Each item was rated on a 3-point ordinal scale with 1-2 indicating an area of concern, 3 indicating an area for some concern and 4- 5 indicating an area of strength. Eight subscales constructed from items of the PCERA have been theoretically derived and confirmed by factor analysis (Clark, 1999; Clark et al., 1997). For ease of analysis this scale was transformed to a -1 to +1 range. Scores were recorded as 1 or 2 = -1, 3= 0, 4 or 5 = 1. The total PCERA score is the mean of all the subscale mean scores and ranged -1 (highest risk of atypical interactions) to +1 (most positive interactions).

Time frame:
Baseline, End phase 1, End of intervention, 1 month post intervention
Reported as:
Mean · Mean Score on PCERA
Parent Child Early Relational Assessment (PCERA)
Mean Score on PCERAUsual Care GroupSPEEDI Intervention
Baseline0.27 ± 0.170.13 ± 0.29
End phase 10.20 ± 0.300.38 ± 0.33
End of intervention Phase 20.34 ± 0.240.25 ± 0.23
1 months post intervention0.50 ± 0.510.26 ± 0.25
SecondaryBayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development (Bayley).

The Bayley-III is a norm references standardized developmental assessment of Motor, Cognitive, and Language skills. Composite scores for each domain have a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15. A score of 85-115 is considered average. Higher composite scores represent higher or better performance on that subtest. The Bayley was administered at the final follow-up visit and 3 months after the intervention ended.

Time frame:
3 month post intervention
Reported as:
Mean · Mean Composite Score on Bayley
Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development (Bayley).
Mean Composite Score on BayleyUsual Care GroupSPEEDI Intervention
Motor 3 months post intervention79.6 ± 20.898.6 ± 11.4
Cognitive 3 months post intervention80.0 ± 13.591.0 ± 8.9
Language 3 months post intervention89.0 ± 19.698.2 ± 9.6
SecondaryTest of Infant Motor Performance (TIMP)

The TIMP is a standardized and norm references test of motor control and posture in infants 4 months of age and younger which is commonly used with infants starting at 34 weeks of post-menstrual age. Change in raw score from baseline to end of the intervention is reported. The TIMP raw score ranges from 0 to 142. A higher score represented greater performance in motor control and posture.

Time frame:
Baseline to End of intervention
Reported as:
Median · Raw Score on the TIMP
Test of Infant Motor Performance (TIMP)
Raw Score on the TIMPUsual Care GroupSPEEDI Intervention
Baseline54 (37 to 60)61 (56 to 63)
End of Intervention82 (72 to 95)99 (97 to 118)

Adverse events

Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
Usual Care Group—0/7 (0%)0/7 (0%)
SPEEDI Intervention—0/7 (0%)0/7 (0%)

Baseline characteristics

Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(Weeks of post menstrual age)Usual Care GroupSPEEDI InterventionTotal
Median35 (35 to 39)39 (36 to 40)38 (35 to 39)
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)Usual Care GroupSPEEDI InterventionTotal
Female426
Male358
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)(Participants)Usual Care GroupSPEEDI InterventionTotal
Hispanic or Latino101
Not Hispanic or Latino6713
Unknown or Not Reported000
Race (NIH/OMB)
Race (NIH/OMB)(Participants)Usual Care GroupSPEEDI InterventionTotal
American Indian or Alaska Native000
Asian000
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander000
Black or African American5510
White112
More than one race011
Unknown or Not Reported101
Region of Enrollment
Region of Enrollment(participants)Usual Care GroupSPEEDI InterventionTotal
United States7714
Gestational age
Gestational age(weeks of gestation)Usual Care GroupSPEEDI InterventionTotal
Median26 (25 to 28)25 (24 to 27)25.5 (25 to 27)
Brain Injury (GIII/IV intraventricular hemorrhage , Periventricular leukomalacia, Hypoxic Ischemic E
Brain Injury (GIII/IV intraventricular hemorrhage , Periventricular leukomalacia, Hypoxic Ischemic E(Participants)Usual Care GroupSPEEDI InterventionTotal
Count of participants224
08

Study locations

1 site
  • Virginia Commonwealth University
    Richmond, Virginia 23298, United States
09

References and documents

Publications

  • Dusing SC, Tripathi T, Marcinowski EC, Thacker LR, Brown LF, Hendricks-Munoz KD. Supporting play exploration and early developmental intervention versus usual care to enhance development outcomes during the transition from the neonatal intensive care unit to home: a pilot randomized controlled trial. BMC Pediatr. 2018 Feb 9;18(1):46. doi: 10.1186/s12887-018-1011-4. PubMed 29426320 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No — Given the small sample from a specific time range the data will not be shared due to difficulty de-identifying with demographics of individual infants attached.

10

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
Not marked actual or estimatedDates not marked actual or estimated

The record gives a start of Apr 2014, a primary completion of Oct 2016 and a completion of Oct 2016. It does not say whether these dates are actual or estimated.

Results were first posted in Sep 2017, 11 months after primary completion.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
May 27, 2014
First posted
Jun 3, 2014
Start
Apr 2014
Primary completionActual
Oct 2016
CompletionActual
Oct 2016
Results first posted
Sep 18, 2017
Last update
Jan 29, 2018
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jan 29, 2018, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
11

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT02153736
Collaborators
Foundation for Physical Therapy, Inc., Children's Hospital Foundation
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Jun 3, 2014
Start date
Apr 2014
Primary completion
Oct 2016
Completion
Oct 2016
Results posted
Sep 18, 2017
Last update
Jan 29, 2018

Study contacts

Stacey C Dusing, PhD PT
principal investigator · Virginia Commonwealth University

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Jan 2018. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion