Supporting
children with special needs requires individualized and effective intervention
strategies. It is very important for families, teachers, administrators, and
school-based support personnel to be knowledgeable about evidence-based
approaches to adequately address these unique needs and help minimize the
gap between research and practice. An evidence-based practice can be defined as
a strategy, intervention, treatment, or teaching program that has met rigorous
peer review and other standards and has a history of producing consistent
positive results when experimentally tested and published in peer-reviewed
professional journals. The success of an intervention depends on the
interaction between the age of the child, their developmental level and
individual characteristics, strength of the intervention, competency of the
professional, and a critical component termed treatment integrity.
A
consistent finding in the literature is that higher levels of treatment
integrity are associated with better outcomes. Thus, it is essential that
treatment integrity information be collected when implementing interventions so
as to distinguish between ineffective interventions and potentially effective
treatments implemented with poor integrity. While implementing intervention
procedures with textbook accuracy consistently in “real-world” settings
presents a challenge, practitioners should attempt to implement procedures with
high levels of integrity as often as possible. Direct and indirect
methods can be used to document the extent to which behavioral
interventions agreed upon during consultation are being implemented as intended
by the change agent (e.g. teacher or parent).
Although
systematic observation is the most direct means of assessing treatment
integrity, this procedure is vulnerable to reactivity effects and tends to be a
labor-intensive activity, which is not always possible given the time
constraints and logistical problems encountered in most practice settings.
There are, however, less direct methods that can be utilized to monitor the
integrity of intervention plans. They include: (a) self-reporting; (b)
permanent products; (c) behavioral interviews; and (d) performance
feedback. While these methods are less intrusive, they tend to be less
accurate because they rely primarily on self-reports.
The
social significance of intervention outcomes or social validity is also of
critical importance. Consumers must feel assured that the selected intervention
strategies are effective and appropriate, and that the social objectives are
important to achieve. If the intervention lacks social validity, they are less
likely to apply the effort necessary to implement the intervention, thus
reducing intervention fidelity. Educators, parents and families expect (and
hope) that research will produce interventions and treatments that will improve
quality of life of children. Thus, the measurement of treatment integrity and
social validity should be a standard feature of intervention practice and
research.
Adapted from Wilkinson, L. A. (2017). A best practice guide to assessment and intervention for autism spectrum disorder in schools (Second Edition). London and Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Key References and Further Reading
Bruhn,
A. L., Hirsch, S. E., & Lloyd, J. W. (2015). Treatment integrity in
school-wide programs: A review of the literature (1993-2012). The
Journal of Primary Prevention, 36, 335-349.
Brand,
D. (2014). Topical articles: Treatment Integrity: Why it is important
regardless of discipline. Science in Autism Treatment, 14(2), 6-7,
9-11.
Cochrane,
W. S., & Laux, J. M. (2007). Investigating school psychologists’
perceptions of treatment integrity in school- based interventions for children
with academic and behavior concerns. Preventing School Failure, 51,
29-34.
DiGennaro
Reed, F. D., & Codding, R. S. (2014). Advancements in procedural fidelity
assessment and intervention: Introduction to the special issue. Journal
of Behavioral Education, 23, 1-18.
Gresham,
F. M., Gansle, K. A., Noell, G. H., Cohen, S. & Rosenblum, S. (1993).
Treatment integrity of school-based behavioral intervention studies:
1980–1990, School Psychology Review 22, 254–72.
Gresham,
F. M., MacMillan, D., Beebe-Frankenberger, M. E. & Bocian, K. M. (2000).
Treatment integrity in learning disabilities intervention research: Do we
really know how treatments are implemented? Learning Disabilities Research
and Practice, 15, 198–205.
Gresham,
F. M. (2009). Evolution of the treatment integrity concept: Current status and
future directions. School Psychology Review, 38(4), 533-541.
Hagermoser
Sanetti, L. M., & Kratochwill, T. R. (2008). Treatment integrity in
behavioral consultation: Measurement, promotion, and outcomes. International
Journal of Behavioral Consultation and Therapy, 4, 95-114.
Lane,
K. L., Bocian, K. M., MacMillan, D. L. & Gresham, F. M. (2004). Treatment
integrity: An essential – but often forgotten – component of school-based
interventions, Preventing School Failure, 48, 36–43.
Noell,
G. H., Witt, J. C., Slider, N. J., Connell, J. E., Gatti, S. L., Williams, K.
L., Keonig, J. L., Resetar, J. L. & Duhon, G. J. (2005). Treatment
implementation following behavioral consultation in schools: A comparison of
three follow-up strategies. School Psychology Review 34, 87–106.
Sanetti,
L. M., & Kratochwill, T. R. (2014). Introduction: Treatment integrity in
psychological research and practice. In L. M. Sanetti & T. R. Kratochwill
(Eds.), Treatment integrity: A foundation for evidence-based practice
in applied psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Skolnik,
Samantha, "School Psychologists’ Integrity of Treatment Integrity"
(2016). PCOM Psychology Dissertations. 397. http://digitalcommons.pcom.edu/psychology_dissertations/397
Wilkinson, L. A. (2005). Bridging the research-to-practice
gap in school-based consultation: An example using case studies. Journal
of Educational and Psychological Consultation,16, 175-200.
Wilkinson,
L. A. (2006). Monitoring treatment integrity: An alternative to the ‘consult
and hope’ strategy in school-based behavioural consultation. School
Psychology International, 27,426-438.
Wilkinson,
L. A. (2007). Assessing treatment integrity in behavioral
consultation. International Journal of Behavioral Consultation and
Therapy, 3, 420-432.
Lee A. Wilkinson, PhD, is a licensed and nationally certified school psychologist, and certified cognitive-behavioral therapist. He is author of the award-winning books, A Best Practice Guide to Assessment and Intervention for Autism and Asperger Syndrome in Schools and Overcoming Anxiety and Depression on the Autism Spectrum: A Self-Help Guide Using CBT. He is also editor of a text in the APA School Psychology Book Series, Autism Spectrum Disorder in Children and Adolescents: Evidence-Based Assessment and Intervention in Schools. His latest book is A Best Practice Guide to Assessment and Intervention for Autism Spectrum Disorder in Schools (2nd Edition)