Cristin M Holland1, Erna I Blanche1, Barbara L Thompson1,2. 1. Mrs. T.H. Chan Division of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA. 2. Department of Pediatrics and Human Development, Michigan State University College of Human Medicine, Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA.
Abstract
AIMS: There is limited research on the type and quantity of actions (activities) occupational therapy practitioners utilize when providing sensory integration treatment to children with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD). METHODS: A coding scheme identifying specific aspects of sensory integration treatment was developed and used to analyze 34 videos of 9 children with ASD, aged between 18 and 56 months, treated by 8 occupational therapists. Occupational therapists providing sensory integration treatment to children with ASD were behaviorally coded and rated using Observer XT, a software package designed for analysis of behavioral processes. RESULTS: Verbal communications, including offers, positive commands, and feedback, to facilitate engagement were the most frequent actions enacted by therapists. Proprioceptive activities were the most frequent sensory opportunities presented. Therapists received high ratings for sensitivity qualities. CONCLUSIONS: The number of sensory opportunities and interactions the therapists provided suggest concordance with sensory integration treatment components in the clinical setting. General impression ratings indicate engagement between child and therapist may be an important aspect of sensory integration treatment for young children with ASD. Quantification of therapists' actions can provide insight into the moment-to-moment decision-making and relationships between therapist and child during daily practice of sensory integration treatment.
AIMS: There is limited research on the type and quantity of actions (activities) occupational therapy practitioners utilize when providing sensory integration treatment to children with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD). METHODS: A coding scheme identifying specific aspects of sensory integration treatment was developed and used to analyze 34 videos of 9 children with ASD, aged between 18 and 56 months, treated by 8 occupational therapists. Occupational therapists providing sensory integration treatment to children with ASD were behaviorally coded and rated using Observer XT, a software package designed for analysis of behavioral processes. RESULTS: Verbal communications, including offers, positive commands, and feedback, to facilitate engagement were the most frequent actions enacted by therapists. Proprioceptive activities were the most frequent sensory opportunities presented. Therapists received high ratings for sensitivity qualities. CONCLUSIONS: The number of sensory opportunities and interactions the therapists provided suggest concordance with sensory integration treatment components in the clinical setting. General impression ratings indicate engagement between child and therapist may be an important aspect of sensory integration treatment for young children with ASD. Quantification of therapists' actions can provide insight into the moment-to-moment decision-making and relationships between therapist and child during daily practice of sensory integration treatment.
Entities:
Keywords:
Sensory processing; autism; health systems; pervasive developmental disorder; sensation; service delivery