The use of multisensory environments in children and adults with autism spectrum disorder: A systematic review.

Only 10 studies were included, and three of them had just 3 participants each, so the total evidence base is very small. Seven of the ten studies were not randomised, and most did not include a control group, making it hard to separate the effect of the room from the effect of a structured activity or therapist attention. The interventions varied widely in provider (occupational therapist, special educator, nurse, caregiver, unspecified therapist), session length (20 to 60 minutes), frequency (once to five times per week), and total duration (1 to 24 weeks), so the results cannot be pooled or compared directly. Outcome measures were inconsistent: five studies used custom coding schemes, three used validated scales, and the specific behaviors targeted differed from study to study, which is why no meta-analysis was possible. Sample characteristics were poorly reported: only two studies specified ASD severity, five reported IQ, and no study provided a detailed sensory profile before the intervention. None of the included studies monitored or reported adverse effects, so safety is unknown. The age range spanned 3 to 52 years, and developmental differences between children and adults may have influenced which outcomes improved, making it hard to draw conclusions that apply to both groups.

The authors declared no conflicts of interest. The study was funded by the Ministry of Health, Italy, Current Research Funds 2024.

Do not read the reduction in stereotyped behaviors as proof that multisensory rooms treat autism. Four of the ten studies showed that effect, but the same review found no reliable improvement in social communication, mixed results on disruptive behavior, and null findings on anxiety in two of three studies. The included studies averaged 13 participants per group and used different providers, durations, and settings, so no single conclusion applies to all autistic people.