Effects of Sensory Integration Intervention on Self-Stimulating and Self-Injurious Behaviors

Abstract

This study compared the effects of occupational therapy, using a sensory integration (SI) approach and a control intervention of tabletop activities, on the frequency of self-stimulating behaviors in seven children 8-19 years of age with pervasive developmental delay and mental retardation. Daily 15-min videotape segments of the subjects were recorded before, immediately after, and 1 hour after either SI or control interventions performed during alternating weeks for 4 weeks. Each 15-min video segment was evaluated by investigators to determine the frequency of self-stimulating behaviors. The results indicate that self-stimulating behaviors were significantly reduced by 11% one hour after SI intervention in comparison with the tabletop activity intervention (p = 0.02). There was no change immediately following SI or tabletop interventions. Daily ratings of self-stimulating behavior frequency by classroom teachers using a 5-point scale correlated significantly with the frequency counts taken by the investigators (r = 0.32, p < 0.001). These results suggest that the sensory integration approach is effective in reducing self-stimulating behaviors, which interfere with the ability to participate in more functional activities.

Research on the Efficacy of Sensory Integration Therapy: Past, Present and Future

“…Measurement scales that could not be interpreted in terms of functional changes in behaviour were employed in some studies (Linderman & Stewart, 1999;Soper & Thorley, 1996), only very immediate effects were investigated in others (Smith, Press et al, 2005;Urwin & Ballinger, 2005) and interobserver reliability was inadequate in others (Linderman & Stewart, 1999;Soper & Thorley, 1996). The studies employing small n designs were particularly poorly implemented and interpreted for the most part, as previously documented.…”

“…Most importantly, and as previously noted, the use of an adapted rating scale makes the results difficult to interpret in terms of functional outcomes, particularly as the meaning of points on the scale was not explained. Smith, Press et al (2005) conducted a study with children and adolescents described as having pervasive developmental disorders and/or severe intellectual disability, although participant description was scant. The frequency of selfstimulatory or self-injurious behaviour was measured in classrooms prior to treatment each day, immediately post SIT or table-top activity sessions, and one hour after these sessions.…”

“…Sensory processing difficulties are often described as a key feature of ASD (O'Neill & Jones, 1997). Five studies (Case- Smith & Bryan, 1999;Green et al, 2003;Linderman & Stewart, 1999;Smith, Press et al, 2005;Urwin & Ballinger, 2005) provided examination of the effects of SIT on individuals with ASD or combined intellectual disability and ASD. Linderman and Stewart (1999) implemented SIT with two 3-year-old boys who were diagnosed with autism or were reported to show symptoms of autism.…”

Sensori Integrasi: Dasar dan Efektivitas Terapi

“…Anak lebih berpartisipasi aktif pada kegiatan di sekolah dan di rumah, serta interaksi sosial menjadi lebih baik. [8][9][10] Namun metaanalisis oleh Vargas dkk 11 terhadap penelitian antara tahun 1972-1994 menyimpulkan bahwa penelitian terdahulu lebih memperlihatkan adanya manfaat terapi SI dibandingkan penelitian terbaru dan terapi SI tidak lebih baik dibandingkan terapi alternatif. 4,11 Di berbagai literatur tersebut, penulis senantiasa menyatakan tentang keterbatasan penelitian berupa kurangnya kriteria diagnosik, besar sampel yang kecil, kurangnya standardisasi terapi, dan perbedaan luaran yang diukur yang menimbulkan kesulitan interpretasi.…”

The Use of Sensory Integration Therapy by Intervention Service Providers in Malaysia

“…Sensory integration (SI) therapy is an approach used in intervention that involves the provision of controlled sensory stimulation to the student (Ayres, 1972, p. 114) to address issues in theorised underlying neurological processing that affects the sensory system (Smith, Press, Koenig, & Kinnealey, 2005). An adaptive response, where students modify their behaviour in response to the challenges, is thought to be "the major subjective indicator of degree of sensory integration" (Ayres, 1972, pp.…”