Abstract
AIMS: We compared the efficacy, fidelity, acceptability, and feasibility of a creative movement (CM) intervention for children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), delivered face-to-face (F2F) or through telehealth (TH). METHODS: Fifteen children with ASD received the CM intervention F2F or through TH. Motor assessments were used to evaluate effects of F2F and TH interventions on children's motor skills, while video coding was used to assess affect, socially directed verbalization, interpersonal synchrony, and motor coordination during training. Stakeholder feedback and training fidelity data on the intervention were also collected. RESULTS: Children in both subgroups showed similar baseline performance and training-related improvements in motor skills, positive/interested affect, socially directed verbalization, interpersonal synchrony, and dual/multilimb coordination. Parents in the TH subgroup considered the intervention feasible and acceptable; however, they reported greater effort to supervise and redirect their child's attention compared to the F2F subgroup. Trainers for the TH subgroup reported more communication difficulties, technological issues, and longer session lengths, but found greater parental involvement compared to the F2F subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: CM interventions are consistent, acceptable, feasible, and effective in improving social, behavioral-affective, and motor skills of children with ASD, regardless of the method of delivery. Clinicians should make efforts to reduce communication/technological issues and parental burden when delivering CM interventions through TH. ClinicalTrials.Gov Study ID-NCT04258254.