The study appeared in the June issue of the Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders.
“This is the first study designed to compare long-standing comprehensive treatment models for young children with ASD,” said Dr. Brian Boyd, one of the study’s co-principal investigators. Dr. Boyd is an Assistant Professor with the Department of Allied Health Sciences and a Fellow at UNC’s Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute (FPG).
“We know that more children are being diagnosed with ASD each year, and that it can cost $3.2 million to treat each child over a lifetime. Understanding that a child can benefit from a high-quality program, rather than a specialized program, may help reduce those costs by decreasing the need for teachers and other school practitioners to be trained to deliver multiple specialized services,” Dr. Boyd said. He stressed it remains important to ensure educators are trained to provide high-quality programs that meet the special behavioral, communication, and other needs of children with ASD.
Previous research has shown that when children with ASD have access to early intervention via treatment programs, they improve developmentally. Until now, however, debate has persisted over which approach to use, said Dr. Boyd.
Two frequently used comprehensive treatment models have a long history: LEAP (Learning Experiences and Alternative Program for Preschoolers and their Parents) and TEACCH (now known only by its acronym).
FPG’s study examined the relative effects of the LEAP and TEACCH school-based comprehensive treatment models when compared to each other and to special-education programs that do not use a specific model. The multisite study took place only in high-quality classrooms and enrolled 74 teachers and 198 3- to 5-year-olds in public school districts.
The study found that children made gains over the school year regardless of the classroom’s use of LEAP, TEACCH, or no specific comprehensive treatment model. “Each group of children showed significant positive change in autism severity, communication and fine-motor skills,” said Dr. Kara Hume, FPG scientist and co-author. “No statistically significant differences were found among models, which challenged our initial expectations—and likely the field’s.”
“This study may shift the field’s thinking about comprehensive treatment models designed for young children with ASD,” said co-author Dr. Samuel L. Odom, FPG’s Director and the study’s principal investigator. “Perhaps it’s not the unique features of the models that most contribute to child gains but the common features of the models that most influence child growth.”
Researchers from East Tennessee State University, the University of Miami, Florida International University, University of Minnesota, and Griffith University also participated in the study.
Findings from the study were featured in the July 19, 2013, edition of The News and Observer.