Interactions between behavior function and psychotropic medication

Abstract

We reanalyzed published studies that reported functional analyses conducted in the presence and absence of medication. In Analysis 1, we assessed the overall effect of psychotropic medication on problem behavior. Medication had a reductive effect in 29 of the 37 sets of functional analyses reviewed. The magnitude of the effect was associated with the baseline level of responding according to a rate‐dependency function. Analysis 2 examined medication‐induced changes in behavior function. The introduction of medication was followed by the emergence of a new function (1), a change in functions (1), the subtraction of one function in multiply controlled problem behavior (2), and near‐zero levels of responding (6). Thus, in 4 of 37 cases reviewed, medication may have induced function‐specific changes in problem behavior. We discuss the implications of these findings for a closer collaboration between behavior analysts and prescribing professionals in the treatment of problem behavior.

Predictive validity and efficiency of ongoing visual‐inspection criteria for interpreting functional analyses

“…One limitation of this study was that the researchers investigated levels of visual-inspection agreement only with FA datasets with 10 data points per condition; therefore, the generality of the findings to FAs of different lengths remained unknown. To address this limitation, Roane, Fisher, Kelley, Mevers, and Bouxsein (2013) refined the structured criteria developed by Hagopian et al to make them applicable to FA datasets of various lengths (see also Cox & Virues-Ortega, 2016). …”

Interpreting functional analysis outcomes using automated nonparametric statistical analysis

“…Note that in this version, no minimum value for the UCL is stipulated, but if the value for the LCL results in a number less than zero, the LCL is drawn at zero. Further modifications to these methods have also been proposed for data obtained using partial‐interval recording and expressed as a percentage of intervals (Cox & Virues‐Ortega, ). For example, for data expressed as a percentage, it has been suggested that the minimum value for the UCL be set at 8.33% (Langthorne et al, ).…”

“…There is also a need for a consistent interpretation scheme that can be replicated for studies that conduct FAs across a large number of individuals. For example, Cox and Virues‐Ortega () applied the PHVI criteria to 37 FA datasets to assess the impact of various psychotropic medications on the functions of problem behavior. In studies requiring the aggregation of multiple datasets, an objective, automated, and reliable standard for FA interpretation would be desirable.…”

Adverse Side Effects of Psychotropic Medication and Challenging Behavior: Pilot Work Assessing Impact

“…Use of this design to evaluate medication impact on behavior is novel and perhaps unconventional, but it allowed for comparisons of a given ASE condition across medication regimens (Cox & Virues-Ortega, 2016). Thus, results from one condition were compared with the those from the same condition across different medication regimens.…”