Stereotypi in Motor-, Vocal- and Feeding Behaviors: Novel Extensions to Adults
Trial Snapshot
- Phase
- Not Applicable
- Status
- Recruiting
- Sponsor
- Enrollment
- 8
- Locations
- 1
- Primary Endpoint
- Frequency recording
Study Overview
Brief Summary
Adults with developmental disabilities (DD) and autism represent a vulnerable demographic that transitions into adulthood with diverse etiologies, exhibiting a significantly higher prevalence of various challenging behaviors. These problematic behaviors can lead to adverse health outcomes and a diminished quality of life. Addressing these issues often necessitates an interdisciplinary approach to continuity of care, focusing on enhancing functional skills, empowerment, and independence, as well as preventing and mitigating challenging behaviors. The current research proposal comprises of three studies designed to evaluate the efficacy of behavioral interventions for problematic behaviors in adults with DD and autism. If left unaddressed, these behaviors may worsen over time, potentially hindering community involvement, educational opportunities, and employment prospects. These include harmful stereotypies and feeding difficulties.
Detailed Description
Study 1: A behavioral intervention of food refusal in adults with developmental disabilities
Feeding disorders are common in both children and adults with DD. Among the most serious of these is the total refusal to consume food and liquid, which may present a life-threatening or severely debilitating condition. The evidence base for interventions for adults with DD and food refusal is severely limited or lacking to my knowledge. One notable exception is a study by Kitfield and Masalsky (2000), who treated a woman aged 22 using a behavioral intervention consisting of negative reinforcement in the form of escape from food as well as to other areas, which resulted in impressive weight gains during treatment and follow-up. The lack of empirically supported treatment for food refusal in adults with DD may be because food-related issues usually have an early onset and are, therefore, more often diagnosed and treated in children. Additionally, some treatments may be viewed as more invasive when applied to adults. For example, escape extinction is the most empirically supported treatment component for food refusal and selective eating among children with DD. However, implementing escape extinction in an adult may be ethically questionable because of its invasive nature, which is practically challenging or dangerous, especially when other problem behaviors are present.
In a study by Hagopian et al. (1996), total food and liquid refusal in a 12-year old boy with autism was treated with backward chaining, fading, and activity reinforcement, which successfully resulted in drinking from a cup generalized to his living unit. Fading and differential reinforcement may have an ethical and intuitive appeal when treating food and liquid refusal in adults with DD and may therefore be accepted by caregivers and adults with DD. This is because it involves gradual re-introduction of oral intake and the use of positive reinforcement. In addition, research has demonstrated that stimulus fading may render escape extinction unnecessary. Therefore, there is a need to extend the use of such procedures to adults with food and/or liquid refusal.
Study 2: A behavioral intervention of slow eating in adults with DD
Individuals with DD often require considerably more time to complete tasks of daily living than their neurotypical peers do. When slow responding becomes excessive, it may be a barrier in daily living as self-care, and finishing meals in time before scheduled events may lead to missed activities or services, family stress, and logistical challenges. Such slowness has been hypothesized to result from neurological impairments causing a slow motor response, a secondary symptom of obsessive compulsive disorder, or as a primary feature, an operant modifiable by its consequences.
Study Design
- Study Type
- Interventional
- Allocation
- Non Randomized
- Intervention Model
- Sequential
- Primary Purpose
- Treatment
- Masking
- Single (Outcomes Assessor)
Eligibility Criteria
- Ages
- 18 Years to — (Adult, Older Adult)
- Sex
- All
- Accepts Healthy Volunteers
- No
Inclusion Criteria
- •Participants will be recruited through referrals at the Department of Neurohabilitation, or from other hospitals in the Oslo Region.
- •be 18 years or older,
- •have a DD, autism spectrum disorder or a PDD-NOS diagnosis
- •and be referred to the specialist habilitation service for adults.
Exclusion Criteria
- •If there are medical causes of the participant's behavioral problem or
- •a reasonable possibility that the referred problem is caused by medical variables
- •if the client participant receives communal care services and if those are not in accordance with Norwegian standards of services for individuals with DD.
- •This could include inappropriate staff-to-client ratio,
- •lack of stimulating activities,
- •or if on-site training is insufficient.
- •the exclusion criteria do not exclude health care from The Oslo University Hospital.
Arms & Interventions
Debilitating stereotypi
Intervention
Intervention: Response interruption with redirection (Behavioral)
Debilitating stereotypi
Intervention
Intervention: Chained schedules (Behavioral)
Intake refusal
Intervention
Intervention: Fading and chaining combined with differential reinforcement (Behavioral)
Slow pace of self-feeding
Intervention
Intervention: Differential reinforcement of high rate (Behavioral)
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
Frequency recording
Time Frame: Each experimental phase will last until there is a stable-state performance of the target behavior, typically within 4-8 weeks.
Each target behavior in the study will be measured with a frequency recording and graphed as behavior change over time.
Secondary Outcomes
No secondary outcomes reported
Investigators
Petur Ingi Petursson
Principal investigator
Oslo University Hospital
