Pilot programme of modular symptom-specific group cognitive behaviour therapy in a 'Real World' early intervention in psychosis service

Comparative effectiveness trial: Modular behavior approach for young autistic children compared to comprehensive behavioral intervention

This 24-week single-blind trial tested a modular approach for young autistic children (MAYAC) that was delivered for fewer hours per week and modified based on child progress and parental input compared to comprehensive behavioral intervention treatment as usual (CBI, TAU). Participants were autistic children, ages 18-60 months of age. MAYAC was initially 5 h of intervention per week, one of which was parent training and the other four direct therapy focusing on social communication and engagement, but additional modules could be added for up to 10 h per week. Comprehensive behavior intervention was delivered for ≥15 h per week. Outcome measures included the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales; VABS, the Ohio Autism Clinical Improvement Scale - Autism Severity; OACIS - AS and the Pervasive Developmental Disorder Behavior Inventory - Parent; PDDBI-P. Implementation and parent satisfaction measures were also collected. Fifty-six children, mean age of 34 months, were randomized. Within-group analysis revealed significant improvements from baseline to week 24 for both MAYAC (p < 0.0001) and CBI, TAU (p < 0.0001) on the VABS. The noninferiority test was performed to test between group differences and MAYAC was not inferior to CBI, TAU on the VABS (p = 0.0144). On the OACIS - AS, 48.0% of MAYAC and 45.5% of CBI were treatment responders there were no significant changes on the PDDBI-P, for either group. Treatment fidelity was high for both groups (>95%) as was parent satisfaction. Findings from this small trial are promising and suggest MAYAC may be an alternative for some young autistic children and their families to CBI, TAU.

Service decomposition: a conceptual analysis of modularizing services

Purpose

– Applying “modularity” principles in services is gaining in popularity. The purpose of this paper is to enrich existing service modularity theory and practice by exploring how services are being decomposed and how the modularization aim and the routineness of the service(s) involved may link to different decomposition logics. The authors argue that these are fundamental questions that have barely been addressed.

Design/methodology/approach

– The authors first built a theoretical framework of decomposition steps and the design choices involved that distinguished six decomposition logics. The authors conducted a systematic literature search that generated 18 empirical articles describing 16 service modularity cases. The authors analysed these cases in terms of decomposition logic and two main contingencies: modularization aim and service routineness.

Findings

– Only three of the 18 articles explicitly addressed the service decomposition by reflecting on the underlying design choices. By unravelling the decomposition in each case, the authors were able to identify the decomposition logic and found four of the six theoretically derived logics: single-level process oriented; single-level outcome oriented; multilevel outcome oriented; and multilevel combined orientation. Although the authors did not find a direct relationship between the modularization aim and the decomposition logic, the authors did find that single-level decomposition logics seem to be mainly applied in non-routine service offerings whereas the multilevel ones are mainly applied in routine service offerings.

Originality/value

– By contributing to a common understanding of modular service decomposition and proposing a framework that explicates the design choices involved, the authors enable an enhanced application of the modularity concept in services.