How meaningful is more? Considerations regarding intensity in early intensive behavioral intervention

Changes in Autistic Symptoms and Adaptive Functioning of Children Receiving Early Behavioral Intervention in a Community Setting: A Latent Growth Curve Analysis

Despite showing effects in well-controlled studies, the extent to which early intensive behavioral intervention (EBI) produces positive changes in community-based settings remains uncertain. Thus, our study examined changes in autistic symptoms and adaptive functioning in 233 children with autism receiving EBI in a community setting. The results revealed nonlinear changes in adaptive functioning characterized by significant improvements during the intervention and a small linear decrease in autistic symptoms from baseline to follow-up. The intensity of intervention, initial age, IQ and autistic symptoms were associated either with progress during the intervention or maintenance during the follow-up. The next step to extend this line of research involves collecting detailed data about intervention strategies and implementation fidelity to produce concrete recommendations for practitioners.

Neurodiversity and Autism Intervention: Reconciling Perspectives Through a Naturalistic Developmental Behavioral Intervention Framework

Proponents of autism intervention and those of the neurodiversity movement often appear at odds, the former advocating for intensive treatments and the latter arguing that autism must be accepted as a form of diversity. The history of behavioral intervention has understandably outraged many in the Autistic community, though many still value supports focused on quality of life. This commentary argues that Naturalistic Developmental Behavioral Interventions (NDBIs) hold promise for bridging the gap between early intervention and the neurodiversity movement. However, we recognize NDBIs have much room to grow and suggest multiple strategies for improvement. We believe these updates are not only feasible for clinicians and researchers to implement but will ultimately lead to improved quality of life for Autistic individuals.

Ethical Issues in ABA-based Service Provision for Autism in Limited-Resource Contexts: A Case Example of the People’s Republic of China

Recommendations for intervention for young children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) focus on early, intensive, and often individual intervention based on methods of applied behavior analysis. In much of the world, there are few options for early intervention. This article examines this question: in a context where intensive and high staff-to-student ratio intervention is not possible, how can provision of high-quality evidence-based intervention be ensured? We consider the case of China, where intervention for young children with autism is provided at diverse educational organizations, and funding limitations impact teacher-to-student ratio. Due to challenges, rigorous use of evidence-based methods often lags behind best practices. This article presents an ethical analysis of the choices educators face and research-based recommendations consistent with the ethical analysis. Given the current context, we recommend a socially valid approach of systematically using group instruction based on ABA principles to increase the effectiveness and intensity of each aspect of intervention programs. While focused on the case of China, recommendations and analysis have implications for other settings with limited resources.

Patient Outcomes After Applied Behavior Analysis for Autism Spectrum Disorder

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to examine patterns of service receipt and patient outcomes for children receiving applied behavior analysis (ABA) for autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in an integrated health care system in which commercially insured children were covered by a state autism mandate.

METHODS

This retrospective, observational study used a random sample of children with ASD (3-17 yrs) who were members of a large integrated health care system in Southern California and referred for ABA between January 2016 and November 2018. From the 4145 children referred, a random stratified sample of 334 was selected to extract data from clinical reports over 24 months of services. The primary outcome measures were time in ABA and child adaptive behavior.

RESULTS

Thirteen percent of the sample never received ABA after referral. Of those who were referred for ABA, 66% initiated ABA and remained in services for 12 months, whereas less than half (46%) remained in services for 24 months. Having a history of special education was associated with longer time spent in ABA, whereas having a single parent was associated with discontinuation of ABA. A minority of children received a full ABA dose (28%), but the lowest functioning children still experienced clinically significant adaptive behavior gains after 24 months of ABA (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

In a health system implementation of ABA for children with ASD, there were high rates of ABA discontinuation and low ABA dosing. These challenges may diminish the potential benefits of ABA, even in a context in which there is mandated commercial insurance coverage.

Examining US Public Early Intervention for Toddlers With Autism: Characterizing Services and Readiness for Evidence-Based Practice Implementation

As the rates of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) increase and early screening efforts intensify, more toddlers with high likelihood of ASD are entering the United States' (US') publicly funded early intervention system. Early intervention service delivery for toddlers with ASD varies greatly based on state resources and regulations. Research recommends beginning ASD-specific evidence-based practices (EBP), especially caregiver-implemented intervention, as early as possible to facilitate the development of social-communication skills and general learning. Translating EBP into practice has been challenging, especially in low-resourced areas. The main goal of this study was to obtain a more comprehensive understanding of public early intervention system structure, service delivery practices, and factors influencing EBP use for children with ASD in the US. Participants (N = 133) included 8 early intervention state coordinators in 7 states, 29 agency administrators in those states, 57 early intervention providers from those agencies, and 39 caregivers of children with ASD receiving services from those providers. Online surveys gathered stakeholder and caregiver perspectives on early intervention services as well as organizational factors related to EBP implementation climate and culture. Stakeholders identified key intervention needs for young children with ASD. In general, both agency administrators and direct providers reported feeling somewhat effective or very effective in addressing most needs of children with ASD. They reported the most difficulty addressing eating, sleeping, family stress, and stereotyped behaviors. Data indicate that children from families with higher income received significantly higher service intensity. While administrators and providers reported high rates of high-quality caregiver coaching (>60%), caregivers reported low rates (23%). Direct providers with more favorable attitudes toward EBP had greater EBP use. In turn, provider attitudes toward EBP were significantly associated with implementation leadership and culture at their agency. Results suggest that publicly funded early intervention programs in the US require additional resources and training for providers and leaders to support improved implementation climate and attitudes toward ASD EBPs. Results also suggest that more state system support is needed to increase use of ASD-specific EBP use, including high-quality caregiver coaching, to better serve toddlers with ASD. Recommendations for implementation strategies are addressed.

Disorders, Disabilities, and Differences: Reconciling the Medical Model with a Neurodiversity Perspective

CASE SECTION

Zoe is a 25-month-old girl who presented to developmental-behavioral pediatrics with her parents for follow-up after receiving a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder with global developmental delay and language impairment 3 months ago. Zoe was born by spontaneous vaginal delivery at term after an uncomplicated pregnancy, labor, and delivery. She had a routine newborn course and was discharged home with her parents 2 days after her birth.At 7 months, Zoe was not able to sit independently, had poor weight gain, and had hypertonia on physical examination. Her parents described her to tense her arms and have hand tremors when she held her bottle during feedings and reported that she had resisted their attempts to introduce pureed or other age-appropriate table foods into her diet. The Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development Screening Test was administered and found a cognitive composite score of 70, language composite score of 65, and motor composite score of 67. Chromosomal microarray analysis, testing for fragile X syndrome, laboratory studies for metabolic disorders, magnetic resonance imaging of the brain, and an audiologic examination were normal. Zoe was referred to and received early intervention services including physical therapy, feeding therapy, and infant stimulation services. By 16 months, Zoe was walking independently and was gaining weight well but continued to have sensory aversions to some foods.At 22 months, Zoe was evaluated by a multidisciplinary team because of ongoing developmental concerns and concerning results on standardized screening for autism spectrum disorder completed at her 18-month preventive care visit. Her parents also reported concern about the possibility of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) because they both were diagnosed with ASD as young children. Both parents completed college and were employed full-time. Zoe's mother seemed to be somewhat anxious during the visit and provided fleeting eye contact throughout the evaluation. Zoe's father was assertive, but polite, and was the primary historian regarding parental concerns during the evaluation.Zoe was noted to have occasional hand flapping and squealing vocalizations while she roamed the examination area grabbing various objects and casting them to the floor while watching the trajectory of their movements. She did not use a single-finger point to indicate her wants or needs and did not initiate or follow joint attention. She met criteria for ASD. In discussing the diagnosis with Zoe's parents, they shared that they were not surprised by the diagnosis. They expressed feeling that Zoe was social and playful, although delayed in her language. Hence, they were more concerned about her disinterest in eating. They were not keen on behavioral intervention because they did not want Zoe to be "trained to be neurotypical." Although the mother did not receive applied behavior analysis (ABA), the father had received ABA for 3 years beginning at age 5 years. He believed that ABA negatively changed his personality, and he did not want the same for Zoe.How would you assist Zoe's parents in identification of priorities for her developmental care while ensuring respect for their perspective of neurodiversity?

Analysis of a Statewide Early Intervention Program for Young Children with ASD

We evaluated the effectiveness of a statewide Medicaid program providing in-home Early Intensive Behavioral Intervention services to young children with Autism Spectrum Disorder living in a rural southern state. Program effectiveness was assessed via the Assessment of Basic Language and Learning Skills-Revised (ABLLS-R). A multi-level growth model was used to show significant variation among children's initial ABLLS-R scores and their growth trajectories. Hispanic children tended to have lower initial scores but demonstrated similar growth compared to their non-Hispanic peers. Children who were older at initial start in the program appeared to have higher initial composite scores and higher growth trajectories. Children in more populous counties had higher initial scores but grew at similar rates to children in more rural counties.

Policy and Practice Barriers to Early Identification of Autism Spectrum Disorder in the California Early Intervention System

Autism spectrum disorder can be reliably diagnosed prior to age 2, and early, intensive intervention has been found to improve long-term outcomes. Nonetheless, most children with ASD do not receive a diagnosis until after age 3, with even later diagnoses for children from non-white ethnic groups. This study conducted telephone surveys with California Part C early intervention managers regarding policies and practices for early identification and intervention for ASD. Findings indicated that 85% of agencies conduct screening for ASD, but only 39% conduct ASD diagnostic assessments prior to age 3. Recommendations for policy changes to align Part C practices with best practice guidelines are provided.

Integrating the Early Start Denver Model into Israeli community autism spectrum disorder preschools: Effectiveness and treatment response predictors

Early intensive intervention has been shown to significantly affect the development of children with autism spectrum disorder. However, the costly implementation of such interventions limits their wide dissemination in the community. This study examined an integration of the Early Start Denver Model into community preschool programs for children with autism spectrum disorder in Israel. Four community preschools implemented the preschool-based Early Start Denver Model and four implemented a multidisciplinary developmental intervention which is widely applied in Israeli community autism spectrum disorder preschools. Fifty-one children (aged 33–57 months) participated in the study. Twenty-six attended the preschool-based Early Start Denver Model preschools and twenty-five attended the multidisciplinary developmental intervention settings. Groups were comparable on age, developmental functioning, and socio-economic status. Compared to the multidisciplinary developmental intervention group, children in the preschool-based Early Start Denver Model treatment made greater gains on blinded measures of overall cognitive development, receptive and expressive language skills, as well as on parent- and teacher-reported adaptive communication and socialization abilities. In the preschool-based Early Start Denver Model group, children with lower symptom severity, higher adaptive functioning, and receptive language abilities at pre-treatment showed greater improvement. This study documents the successful integration of an Early Start Denver Model intervention into pre-existing community preschools, underlining the importance of disseminating evidence-based early intervention in community settings.

Study protocol of the multi-centre, randomised controlled trial of the Frankfurt Early Intervention Programme A-FFIP versus early intervention as usual for toddlers and preschool children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (A-FFIP study)

BACKGROUND

Naturalistic developmental behavioural interventions (NDBI) have been shown to improve autism-specific symptoms in young children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). NDBI approaches, such as the ASD-specific Frankfurt Early Intervention Programme for ASD (A-FFIP), are based on ASD-specific developmental and learning aspects. A-FFIP is a low-intensity intervention which can easily be implemented in the local health care/social welfare system. The aim of the present study is to establish 1-year efficacy of the manualised early intervention programme A-FFIP in toddlers and preschool children with ASD. It is hypothesised that A-FFIP will result in improved ASD-specific symptoms compared to early intervention as usual (EIAU). Child- and family-specific secondary outcomes, as well as moderators and mediators of outcome, will be explored.

METHODS/DESIGN

A prospective, multi-centre, parallel-group, randomised controlled, phase-III trial comparing A-FFIP versus EIAU. A total of 134 children (A-FFIP: 67, EIAU: 67) aged 24-66 months at baseline assessment meeting the criteria for ASD (DSM-5) will be included. The primary outcome is the absolute change of the total score of the Brief Observation of Social Communication Change (BOSCC-AT) between baseline (T2) and 1-year follow-up (T6). The treatment effect will be tested, adjusted for relevant covariates applying a mixed model for repeated measures. Secondary outcomes are BOSCC social communication and repetitive-behaviour scores, single ASD symptoms, language, cognition, psychopathology, parental well-being and family quality of life. Predictors, moderators and mediating mechanisms will be explored.

DISCUSSION

If efficacy of the manualised A-FFIP early intervention is established, the current study has the potential to change clinical practice strongly towards the implementation of a low-intensity, evidence-based, natural early intervention in ASD. Early intervention in ASD requires specialist training, which subsequently needs to be developed or included into current training curricula.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

German Registry for Clinical Trials (Deutscher Register Klinischer Studien, DRKS); ID: 00016330. Retrospectively registered on 4 January 2019. URL: https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00016330.