Implementation of Video Feedback Within a Community Based Naturalistic Developmental Behavioral Intervention Program for Toddlers With ASD: Pilot Study

Abstract

Video feedback (VF) is an intervention delivery technique that complements naturalistic developmental behavioral interventions (NDBI) and parent-mediated interventions (PMI) by using caregiver-child interaction videos reviewed with a clinician to facilitate behavioral change in caregivers. Although VF has been implemented in PMI with young children with ASD, examinations of feasibility and acceptability, as well as the potential effectiveness of VF in community settings, have been limited. In this pilot randomized control trial (NCT03397719; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03397719), families were randomized into a state-funded Early Intervention (EI) NDBI program or the NDBI program augmented with VF. Results demonstrated high levels of implementation and acceptability of VF augmenting the community-based EI program in caregivers and clinicians. Both groups showed significant improvements after 6 months in social communication symptoms and some areas of developmental and adaptive skills.Clinical Trial Registration:https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03397719, identifier: NCT03397719.

Video-Feedback Approach Improves Parental Compliance to Early Behavioral Interventions in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Pilot Investigation

“…Our findings are also consistent with previous evidence reporting that video feedback is an effective and well-accepted strategy to coach parents of young children with autism in various intervention models [ 25 , 26 , 27 ].…”

“…In the video-feedback modality, conversely, the interactions between the parent and the child are videotaped asynchronously; the videos are sent to the therapist before the video-conferencing session and discussed during the online session [ 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 ]. The video-feedback review moment represents an opportunity for the parent to observe themselves “from the outside” and to reflect on their behaviors and the child’s responses.…”

Supporting Caregivers Remotely During a Pandemic: Comparison of WHO Caregiver Skills Training Delivered Online Versus in Person in Public Health Settings in Italy

“…However, although several studies have reported good levels of acceptability related to intervention delivered via telehealth (Pickard et al, 2016 ; Sengupta et al, 2021a ), in virtual CST caregiver participation was lower and contents were overall found to be less acceptable by caregivers, as well as more complex to deliver by facilitators. This may be due to the fact that the virtual CST group disproportionately included parents of non-Italian nationality, who reported indeed that their difficulties with understanding the language were worsened by technological issues, as previously found (Klein et al, 2021 ; Lee et al, 2015 ). In our study we report lower ratings of caregiver participation in virtual CST compared to in-person CST, mirrored by qualitative findings of emotional distance and impotence perceived by facilitators and caregiver difficulties in creating meaningful relationships in virtual CST.…”

“…Technical issues and cumbersome processes to share the videorecording also affected the video-feedback during the virtual home visits, resulting in lack of delivery in a third of opportunities. When video feedback was feasibly delivered, caregivers found it highly useful to have reviewed themselves and their child, as previously reported (Klein et al, 2021 ), but reported that the presence of the camera and the interventionist’s voice during the direct coaching were interfering with the child’s spontaneous behaviour, thus affecting its representativeness. Communicating via Bluetooth headphones or the videoconferencing chat to guide the caregiver and placing the device out of the child’s sight were put forward as possible strategies by facilitators, as suggested by others (Lerman et al, 2020 ).…”

“…Additionally, our novel adapted component of the review of the home practice based on feedback provided on a video of a caregiver-child interaction proved challenging in feasibility. Despite the high acceptability ratings across dimensions both by facilitators and caregivers, it is notable that, due to difficulties in recording or sharing video files (as previously found in Pierson et al, 2021 ), and due to the lack of time (the most frequent barrier for caregivers in Klein et al, 2021 ), a significant portion of caregivers (41%) were not able to share the recording in at least one of the two planned occasions.…”