Early intensive behavioral treatment: Replication of the UCLA model in a community setting. Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 27(2), S145-S155

Valley Mountain Regional Center, Stockton, CA, USA.
Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics (Impact Factor: 2.13). 05/2006; 27(2 Suppl):S145-55. DOI: 10.1097/00004703-200604002-00013
Source: PubMed


Although previous studies have shown favorable results with early intensive behavioral treatment (EIBT) for children with autism, it remains important to replicate these findings, particularly in community settings. The authors conducted a 3-year prospective outcome study that compared 2 groups: (1) 21 children who received 35 to 40 hours per week of EIBT from a community agency that replicated Lovaas' model of EIBT and (2) 21 age- and IQ-matched children in special education classes at local public schools. A quasi-experimental design was used, with assignment to groups based on parental preference. Assessments were conducted by independent examiners for IQ (Bayley Scales of Infant Development or Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scales of Intelligence), language (Reynell Developmental Language Scales), nonverbal skill (Merrill-Palmer Scale of Mental Tests), and adaptive behavior (Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales). Analyses of covariance, with baseline scores as covariates and Year 1-3 assessments as repeated measures, revealed that, with treatment, the EIBT group obtained significantly higher IQ (F = 5.21, p = .03) and adaptive behavior scores (F = 7.84, p = .01) than did the comparison group. No difference between groups was found in either language comprehension (F = 3.82, p = .06) or nonverbal skill. Six of the 21 EIBT children were fully included into regular education without assistance at Year 3, and 11 others were included with support; in contrast, only 1 comparison child was placed primarily in regular education. Although the study was limited by the nonrandom assignment to groups, it does provide evidence that EIBT can be successfully implemented in a community setting.

16 Reads
  • Source
    • "In this study, the changes that occurred during the first year of treatment were generally maintained throughout the second and third years for children in all three groups. Group mean scores in Years 2 and 3 tended to remain within AE5 points of the corresponding group means at the end of Year 1, with the large differences in favor of IBT after one year largely persisting throughout Years 2 and 3. Other studies comparing IBT with eclectic treatment over similar time periods have produced similar findings (Cohen et al., 2006; Eikeseth et al., 2007). One difference is that the IBT advantage was larger after a mean of 31.4 months of treatment than after one year of treatment in the study by Eikeseth et al. (2007). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In a previous study, we compared the effects of just over one year of intensive behavior analytic intervention (IBT) provided to 29 young children diagnosed with autism with two eclectic (i.e., mixed-method) interventions (Howard, Sparkman, Cohen, Green, & Stanislaw, 2005). One eclectic intervention (autism programming; AP) was designed specifically for children with autism and was intensive in that it was delivered for an average of 25-30h per week (n=16). The other eclectic intervention (generic programming; GP) was delivered to 16 children with a variety of diagnoses and needs for an average of 15-17h per week. This paper reports outcomes for children in all three groups after two additional years of intervention. With few exceptions, the benefits of IBT documented in our first study were sustained throughout Years 2 and 3. At their final assessment, children who received IBT were more than twice as likely to score in the normal range on measures of cognitive, language, and adaptive functioning than were children who received either form of eclectic intervention. Significantly more children in the IBT group than in the other two groups had IQ, language, and adaptive behavior test scores that increased by at least one standard deviation from intake to final assessment. Although the largest improvements for children in the IBT group generally occurred during Year 1, many children in that group whose scores were below the normal range after the first year of intervention attained scores in the normal range of functioning with one or two years of additional intervention. In contrast, children in the two eclectic treatment groups were unlikely to attain scores in the normal range after the first year of intervention, and many of those who had scores in the normal range in the first year fell out of the normal range in subsequent years. There were no consistent differences in outcomes at Years 2 and 3 between the two groups who received eclectic interventions. These results provide further evidence that intensive behavior analytic intervention delivered at an early age is more likely to produce substantial improvements in young children with autism than common eclectic interventions, even when the latter are intensive.
    Research in Developmental Disabilities 09/2014; 35(12):3326-3344. DOI:10.1016/j.ridd.2014.08.021 · 3.40 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Most of the studies were case–control or quasi-experimental comparison studies. The studies varied in their sample size and age range of the participants [Cohen et al. 2006 (n = 42; age range 18–42 months); Eldevik et al. 2012 (n = 43; age range 24–72 months); Eldevik et al. 2006 (n = 28; age range 21–69 months); Grindle et al. 2012 (n = 29; age range 36–84 months); Howard et al. 2005 (n = 45; mean age = 31 months); Zachor and Ben-Itzchak (2010) (n = 78; age range 15–35 months)], and compared EIBI to eclectic or special education treatment. These studies reported EIBI was superior to other approaches. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Variability in clinical expression and in intervention outcome has been described in autism spectrum disorder (ASD). The study examined progress after 1 and 2 years of intervention and compared the impact of baseline cognitive ability on outcome trajectories in 46 children (m = 25.5 months) with ASD. The entire group showed a gradual decrease in autism severity and increase in verbal cognitive scores. Only the low cognitive scores (DQ <70) group significantly improved in fine motor and receptive language scores. Significant gains in adaptive skills were found only for the high cognitive scores (DQ ≥70) group after 2 years of intervention. The entire group progressed with intervention, but only children with higher cognitive levels at baseline transferred their acquired socio-communication skills into daily functioning.
    Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 08/2014; 44:2221-2229. DOI:10.1007/s10803-014-2091-0 · 3.06 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "However, the groups did not differ on measures of adaptive or socio-emotional functioning. According to the criteria set out by Eikeseth (2009), four studies have obtained Level 2 scientific merit (Cohen et al. 2006; Eikeseth et al. 2007; Howard et al. 2005; Remington et al. 2007). The studies all report more positive outcomes for children in EIBI groups than in comparison groups. "
    Comprehensive Guide to Autism. Section I., Edited by V.B. Patel et al, 01/2014: chapter Early and Intensive Behavioral Intervention (EIBI) in Autism.: pages 117-137; Springer Science.
Show more


16 Reads
Available from