The impact of implementation support on the use of a social engagement intervention for children with autism in public schools

Abstract

Several interventions have demonstrated efficacy in improving social outcomes for children with autism; however, few have been successfully implemented in schools. This study compared two implementation strategies to improve the use of a social engagement intervention for children with autism in public schools. In total, 31 children with autism in grades K-5 and 28 school personnel participated in a randomized controlled trial. Schools were randomized to (1) training in Remaking Recess, a social engagement intervention, or (2) training in Remaking Recess with implementation support. Linear regression with random effects was used to test the intervention effects on implementation fidelity and social outcomes (peer engagement, social network inclusion, and friendship nominations). In both groups, implementation fidelity improved after training but remained low. Children in the Remaking Recess with implementation support condition had significantly higher social network inclusion and received more friendship nominations than children in the Remaking Recess-only condition (p = 0.03). Children in both groups experienced reduced solitary engagement (p < 0.001) and increased joint engagement (p < 0.001). The results suggest that implementation supports may have an effect on outcomes above and beyond the intervention, and that further research is needed into the active intervention mechanisms.

Effectiveness of behavioral interventions for autism spectrum disorder: A systematic review

“…In this line of studies, from 2009, seventy-nine other studies were also published [15-17,19-24-26,27,29-32,34-45,47-77,79,80,83,84,88-94,96,98-102,104-107], and fourteen studies were published from 1994 to 2009 [18,25,28,33,46,78,81,82,[85][86][87]95,97,103]. Fortyone of the above mentioned studies were conducted in USA [18,19,21,23,24,30,32,34,37,38,[42][43][44][45][46][47]49,50,[53][54][55][56]60,61,63,[74][75][76][77][78][79][83][84][85][86][87][88]…”

“…Thirty-two studies used integrative programs [18,20,24,25,28,30,33,[35][36][37]40,52,58,60,62,63,71,74,[77][78][79]81,86,89,92,96,98,[100][101][102][103]107]. Also, thirty studies used social skills development interventions [16,17,19,22,23,29,32,34,38,39,45,47,48,56,57,59,61,64,65,69,72,73,80,…”

“…The results of the included studies were mainly based on observed data and only in fourteen studies, selfreported of participants' practices were used to evaluate the effects of interventions [23,34,40,45,58,61,64,65,70,72,77,79,100,101]. Of the included studies, only twelve (12.9%) used theories and models.…”

“…Of the 30 studies on the social skills development intervention approach, 28 studies were signi cantly reached in all outcomes. 32 studies only examined the impact of the intervention on the social skills of the participants [16,17,22,23,29,32,34,39,47,48,59,64,65,69,72,73,80,[83][84][85]90,99,105], three studies on behavior and social skills [45,57,97], one study on social motivation [38], and one study on social engagement [61]. But, only two studies reported that some of the expected outcomes created signi cant change [19,56].…”

Understanding Friendship Sex Heterophily and Relational Characteristics to Optimize the Selection of Peer Models for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder

“…Data were drawn from three studies that examined the effects of a peer-mediated social engagement intervention of children with ASD in under resourced public schools around the United States (Kasari et al 2012, 2016; Locke et al, in press). All children with baseline and exit data points who were enrolled in an active peer-mediated intervention (N = 126) were included in this study.…”