Sensory and repetitive behaviors among children with autism spectrum disorder at home.
Anne V Kirby, Brian A Boyd, Kathryn L Williams and 2 others
PMID 27091950WHAT IT FOUND
In children's homes, negative reactions to sounds, sights and touch clustered in care routines and family-initiated tasks.
Sensory seeking clustered in free play and child-led moments. Repetitive behavior looked similar but was not confirmed, and hyporesponsive behavior was too rare.
Key findings
01Hyperresponsive behaviors happened mainly during activities of daily living and were most associated with family-initiated stimuli.
02Sensory seeking behaviors happened mainly during free play and were most associated with child-initiated stimuli, while repetitive/stereotypic behaviors showed a similar pattern but the study did not confirm it.
03Hyporesponsive behavior was coded for only one child, so the study could not test its planned hypotheses about that pattern.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study included only 32 children, and it was limited by the small number of children coded for some behavior patterns. Hyporesponsive behavior was coded for only one child in 3 instances, so the study could not test its ideas about that pattern. The videos were collected during scheduled home visits, so the findings may not cover all times, activities, or settings in a child's day. A videographer and camera were present in the home, which may have changed how the child and family behaved. The sample had 28 boys and 4 girls, and all children had confirmed autism spectrum disorder plus elevated parent-reported sensory scores. Sensory seeking was coded in 21 children and repetitive/stereotypic behavior in 12 children, so the number of observed behaviors differed across patterns.
Declared interests
The larger project was federally funded, and families received $50 for completing three home video visits. The supplied text does not include a separate conflict-of-interest declaration.
The easy way to misread this
Do not treat this as evidence that a sensory intervention works, because no intervention was tested. Do not assume the home video method captured all sensory patterns equally. Hyporesponsive behavior was coded for only one child, and repetitive/stereotypic behavior did not show the same clear context pattern as sensory seeking.