Iterative redesign of a caregiver-mediated intervention for use in educational settings

Abstract

Teachers endorse disruptive behavior as a considerable concern for autistic students, which is compounded by the lack of adequate resources for behavioral intervention planning in the classroom. The RUBI program is an evidence-based, low-intensity manualized intervention, initially developed for parents of autistic children ages 3–14 and co-occurring disruptive behavior. Utilizing the Discover, Design/Build, Test (DDBT) framework, which combines user-centered design and implementation science, RUBI intervention content was collaboratively and iteratively redesigned with elementary school stakeholders (40 school staff from 28 schools) to ensure the feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of the redesigned intervention, RUBI in Educational Settings (RUBIES). Iterative quantitative and qualitative methods were conducted with stakeholders to identify targets for RUBI redesign. Conventional content analysis was used to code qualitative data and identify usability issues. Recommendations were provided for modifications to RUBI sessions to address the needs of the school context and end-users to develop RUBIES. Feasibility scores improved following the redesign. The use of the DDBT framework to redesign the RUBI intervention may promote greater usefulness and usability in school contexts.

Lay abstract

Teachers often report concerns about behavior challenges in their students with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in the school setting. Furthermore, teachers often report that they do not have adequate training in how to manage these challenging behaviors effectively. The RUBI program is an intervention initially developed for parents of children with ASD and co-occurring challenging behavior in clinic settings. The present project used school staff input to systematically redesign RUBI to be used with educators in schools. School staff gave input at multiple stages of development to ensure the adapted intervention was appropriate to use in a school setting. Responses were coded and analyzed to identify strengths and weaknesses of the RUBI manual in schools and adaptations were made accordingly. Scores of how appropriate, possible, likable, and usable RUBI would be in schools rose after the intervention was redesigned. The redesigned RUBIES manual may give school staff the tools they need to manage disruptive behaviors. In addition, collaborating with providers over multiple stages to redesign established interventions for new contexts may be a promising way to help bring research tools to practice in the future.