Question
What are some of your findings from the SenSA Laboratory at Ohio State University and your review of the literature when looking at current sensory interventions for autism?
Answer
Our lab is called the SenSA Laboratory which stands for Sensory motor Signs of Autism. In this talk, we will review our findings as well as a review of what we have found in the literature.
Here are the three core messages:
Many but not all children with autism display behaviors consistent with sensory processing difficulties.
Our current data suggests that sensory processing difficulties by parent report occur in up to 80%, but we do have a very recent dataset, in the last week or so, that suggests that is only in about 60% of children with autism. Another 20% to 40% might be considered to experience either no sensory impairment or mild difficulties only. I think that is important to understand and acknowledge when we are thinking about the sorts of treatments that we to offer children with autism.
Secondly, as Chelsea outlined, the evidence for the effectiveness of sensory-based therapies in autism is mixed, and more rigorous research is needed before we can confidently conclude that sensory-based therapies are effective.
We have some initial clues from the literature that sensory strategies such as classic Ayres’ Sensory Integration and Qigong massage, to date, showing the highest levels of evidence for support for use.
Lastly, sensory-based therapy should be applied differentially to children with autism based on the thorough assessment of need and their pattern of sensory behavior.
When using a parent report tool such as the sensory profile, if we do not see significant difficulties by this report or we do not observe those clinically, then we really need to consider whether a sensory-based strategy is likely to benefit that child.
What we can say though is that it is likely that sensory strategies may reduce maladaptive behaviors in those children that seem to be displaying sensory difficulties. We see that, mostly by anecdotal report, the sensory difficulties are highly linked to difficulties in functioning in daily life. The evidence that Chelsea has supported suggests that those strategies such as Ayres’ Sensory Integration and Qigong massage are effective in managing regulation and attention, and other adaptive behaviors.
It is likely that the Ayres’ Sensory Integration approach, because of its basis at looking at the vestibular, proprioceptive, and tactile systems, is likely to benefit children with autism who have motor components. I am sure some of you will know of children that you have seen or are seeing who do present with a component of motor difficulty, whether it is incoordination or postural challenges, and my contention would be that they are children that are most likely to benefit from an Ayres’ Sensory Integration approach.
The last point that I would say is that it is important to be precise in your intervention plan and documenting what it is you are actually doing. There are a lot of sensory-based therapies that have been collected under the general term of sensory integration that really are not classic Ayres’ Sensory Integration which I think is problematic, both in terms of providing the highest level of evidence-based practice and also in furthering our understanding through controlled research.
