Building on established relationships between the constructs of sensory integration in typical and special needs populations, in this retrospective study we examined patterns of sensory integrative dysfunction in 273 children ages 4-9 who had received occupational therapy evaluations in two private practice settings. Test results on the Sensory Integration and Praxis Tests, portions of the Sensory Processing Measure representing tactile overresponsiveness, and parent report of attention and activity level were included in the analyses. Exploratory factor analysis identified patterns similar to those found in early studies by Ayres

Objective. This study evaluated a five factor model of sensory integration dysfunction on the basis of scores of children on the Sensory Integration and Praxis Tests (SIPT).The purpose of the study was to determine a plausible model for understanding sensory integration dysfunction. Method. The hypothesized model of sensory integration dysfunction tested was derived from previous multivariate analyses and consisted of five patterns of dysfunction, including: bilateral integration and sequencing, somatosensory, somatopraxis, visuopraxis, and postural ocular motor. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of the SIPT scores of 10,475 children and the scores of a subgroup of 995 children with learning disabilities were used to evaluate the model. Results. The CFA of the hypothesized model indicated numerous weaknesses with it and, therefore, was rejected. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was then performed with the same data set to identify a better-fitting, more parsimonious model o/sensory integration dysfunction. A second-order, four-factor model using generalized practic dysfunction as the second-order factor and four first-order factors (dyspraxia, bilateral integration and sequencing deficit, visuoperceptual deficit, somatosensory deficit) were pro-posed. The CFA supported this model as the better-fitting model. The proposed model held true when tested with the subgroup of children with learning disabilities. Conclusions. The modified model of sensory integration dysfunction proposed indicated that it was a good fit for the data and improved on the initial model. Clinical implications of the findings relate to the interpretation of SIPT scores and provide suggestions for test development measuring sensory integration functions. The proposed model has applications for occupational therapy intervention using sensory integration as the primary frame of reference.

The results suggest that it may be helpful for therapists to consider the areas of praxis and vestibular processing in the evaluation and treatment of children with ADHD and that in clinical practice, it would be difficult to distinguish children with ADHD from those without on the basis of their SIPT scores. However, the ways in which the SIPT score patterns of children with ADHD differed from those without assist our understanding of the brain areas and neurological systems involved in children with ADHD.

We compared the sensory and motor behaviors of typically developing infants with those of infant siblings of children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD), who are considered high risk for the disorder, to explore potential sensory and motor markers for use in early diagnosis of ASD. We compared frequencies of sensory and motor behaviors during 10-min, videotaped, infant-mother play sessions and during 5 min of spoonfeeding between groups of 12-mo-old infants. Data from standardized measures of development, sensory processing, and behaviors commonly associated with ASD were also analyzed descriptively for the high-risk group. The results indicated that high-risk infants demonstrated fewer movement transitions (t [23] 5 22.4, p 5 .03) and less object manipulation (t [23] 5 22.4, p 5 .03) than low-risk infants. The sensory and motor differences found between typical and high-risk infants suggest that early screenings for ASD should include the examination of sensory and motor behaviors.

OBJECTIVE. This quasi-experimental study sought to determine whether children with possible sensory processing deficits, as measured by the Sensory Profile, performed less well on an occupational performance measure compared to children with typical Sensory Profile scores. METHOD. Sixty-eight children were administered both the Assessment of Motor Process Skills (AMPS) and the Sensory Profile. After the assessments were completed, children were divided into two groups based on their Sensory Profile scores. RESULTS. Independent t tests indicated statistically significant differences between groups on the AMPS ADL [Activities of Daily Living] Motor and ADL Process measures (p < .05), with the children with atypical Sensory Profile scores showing more functional difficulties. Correlations revealed significant relationships among the measures. CONCLUSION. The results suggest that children identified with sensory processing deficits on the Sensory Profile are likely to experience some challenges in performing everyday occupations.