2017
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph14070776
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Impact of a Horse Riding Intervention on the Social Functioning of Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder

Abstract: This paper reports a case-control study of a horse riding intervention for children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). A sample of 26 children, aged 6 to 9 years, were assigned to either the intervention (n = 12) or control group conditions (n = 14). Pre- and post-tests were carried out using the Childhood Autism Rating Scale, Second Edition (CARS2) and the Aberrant Behaviour Checklist-Community Edition (ABC-C). An observational measure of compliance and behaviour during the horse riding sessions was complet… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

3
40
0
7

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 57 publications
(59 citation statements)
references
References 54 publications
3
40
0
7
Order By: Relevance
“…Additionally, the THR group had significant improvements at 0.1 level on the ABC-C (17) Irritability subscale ( p = 0.08) and SRS (18) Social Communication subscale ( p = 0.08). The replication of finding for hyperactivity but not the irritability subscale on the ABC-C matches up with another small scale study of the effect of THR for children with ASD (19), indicating that THR may have a stronger effect on hyperactivity than on irritability behaviors. There were no significant improvements in the number of words or new words spoken on the SALT (39) standard language sample.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 76%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Additionally, the THR group had significant improvements at 0.1 level on the ABC-C (17) Irritability subscale ( p = 0.08) and SRS (18) Social Communication subscale ( p = 0.08). The replication of finding for hyperactivity but not the irritability subscale on the ABC-C matches up with another small scale study of the effect of THR for children with ASD (19), indicating that THR may have a stronger effect on hyperactivity than on irritability behaviors. There were no significant improvements in the number of words or new words spoken on the SALT (39) standard language sample.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 76%
“…Compared to participants in a barn activity (BA) control group, participants in a 10-week THR intervention made significant improvements in symptoms of irritability and hyperactivity as measured by the Aberrant Behavior Checklist-Community (ABC-C) (17), improvements in core symptoms of autism (e.g., social cognition and social communication) measured by the Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS) (18), and word fluency (e.g., total number of words and new words spoken) measured by a standardized language sample (1). A more recent study of THR replicated use of the ABC-C (17) to measure outcomes in a sample of 26 children with ASD (19). This study found that children participating in five to seven 45-minute weekly riding lessons compared to a control group receiving treatment as usual, improved on the ABC-C (17) Hyperactivity scale, but not on the Irritability scale (19).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 91%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, despite the increasingly growing body of motor research conducted in ASD, no particular motor symptomatology is uniquely identified as ASD [83]. Nonetheless, several researchers have put forth predictions for the utility and impact of motor assessments for diagnostics and/or outcome measurements in ASD [84,85,86,87,88]. Motor assessments utilized as a diagnostic tool would be ideal since motor dysfunctions are persistent across development [89,90,91,92] and consist of quantifiable metrics that can more easily be detected and measured than social impairments.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There were no significant changes in the level of sleepiness, irritability, stereotype and inappropriate speech of participants after the intervention period. (Harris and Williams, 2017).…”
Section: Introduction and Purposementioning
confidence: 99%