Skip to main content
. 2024 Feb 26;47(1):139–166. doi: 10.1007/s40614-024-00398-1

Table 5.

Final Treatment Outcomes

Study Participant ID Procedure Selected for Treatment Avoidance Index and Rank of Selected Procedure Final Treatment Efficacy Reported by Authors (%)
Fisher et al. (1994a) Hatti Contingent Demands 8.5 (1/8) 90.6
Milt Facial Screen 5.7 (1/4) 91.2
Fisher et al. (1994b) Ava Facial Screen 3.4 (1/9) NS
Jeff Facial Screen 24.0 (1/7) NS
Tom Facial Screen 113.0 (1/6) NS
Toole et al. (2004) Mitchell NS NS NS
Nancy NS NS NS
DeRosa et al. (2016) Darnell Facial Screen NS 96.5
Manente & LaRue (2017) Tony Reprimand NS 85.7
Mitteer et al. (2015) Callie Facial Screen NS NS
Kurtz et al. (2003) Case 1 NS NS

100 (SIB)

99.7 (Combined)

Case 2 NS NS

94.0 (SIB)

29.6 (Combined)

Case 4 NS NS

100 (SIB)

95.9 (Combined)

Case 5 NS NS

77.0 (SIB)

76.8 (Combined)

Case 7 NS NS

100 (SIB)

89.4 (Combined)

Case 11 NS NS

100 (SIB)

94.0 (Combined)

Case 19 NS NS

89.0 (SIB)

62.8 (Combined)

Case 21 NS NS

74.5 (SIB)

82.2 (Combined)

Case 26 NS NS

100 (SIB)

99.7 (Combined)

Case 29 NS NS 89.7 (SIB)
Kurtz et al. (2015) Andrew Baskethold NS 93.3; 98.3
Ben Facial Screen NS 94.9
Simmons et al. (2021) Norbert Baskethold 2.0 (3/4) 86.4
Jordan Baskethold 3.7 (2/4) 90.2
Brown et al. (2021) Case 1 NS NS NS
Case 2 NS NS NS
Case 3 NS NS NS
Case 4 NS NS NS
Case 5 NS NS NS
Case 6 NS NS NS
Case 7 NS NS NS
Case 8 NS NS NS

NS = not specified; Combined = combined destructive behavior