A systematic review of interventions for feeding-related behaviors for individuals with autism spectrum disorders

Blending as a treatment for feeding disorders: A review of the literature

“…A review of abstracts resulted in the identification of six articles that satisfied inclusion criteria. An ancestral search of citations from literature reviews concerning feeding interventions (i.e., Ledford et al, 2018, Silbaugh et al, 2016; Volkert et al, 2016) and studies identified in the electronic search provided no additional articles. A forward search conducted in Google Scholar identified sources that cited articles identified through previous phases of our searches, resulting in an additional four articles.…”

“…Behavioral interventions represent a range of effective techniques for treating feeding disorders unrelated to physical health conditions (Ledford, Whiteside, & Severini, 2018). These methods encompass restrictive procedures, which limit child movement, as well as nonrestrictive procedures that adapt the feeding context.…”

“…Conceptually, blending relates to interventions that involve (a) incremental differentiation of an antecedent stimulus in order to change behavior (e.g., stimulus fading; McIlvane & Dube, 1992), (b) gradually exposing individuals to nonpreferred objects in order to reduce their aversive properties (i.e., systematic desensitization; Rosen, Connell, & Kerns, 2016), and (c) pairing of a preferred stimulus with a neutral or nonpreferred stimulus to expand a client's range of preferences (i.e., respondent conditioning; Dozier, Iwata, Thomason‐Sassi, Wordsell, & Wilson, 2012). Ledford et al (2018) broad review of feeding intervention research found that, of the studies including stimulus fading or shaping as part of a treatment for food acceptance ( n = 27), 37% ( n = 10) demonstrated an effect of intervention. As stimulus fading and shaping procedures encompass a wide array of specific practices, previous systematic reviews of feeding intervention research provide limited insight into the effectiveness or application of blending specifically (e.g., Silbaugh et al, 2016).…”

Sensory Snack Time: A School-Based Intervention Addressing Food Selectivity in Autistic Children

“…However, the high professional to child ratio of these interventions could limit their effectiveness in school settings. Indeed, we were unable to find any studies that had examined a whole class approach delivered in a school setting and there is a need for studies to take into account the ecology of the school setting (Ledford et al, 2018). There are also wider concerns regarding the replicability of the positive effects of some specific behavioral interventions (Silbaugh and Swinnea, 2018) and the generalisability of behavioral treatments to foods that have not been specifically targeted in the intervention (Peterson et al, 2016), highlighting the need for more research in this area.…”

“…As such food selectivity, perpetuated by refusal of new foods, and potentially negative behaviors around the acceptance of new foods, should be seen as an adaptive and communicative response to a physiologically motivated difficulty. The current study seeks to address the need for further research that examines interventions that address food selectivity and sensory differences with larger samples of children in a naturalistic setting (Ledford et al, 2018).…”