Use of Sensory Integration by Rural Pediatric Occupational Therapy Practitioners

Research Objectives: To investigate and describe the use of sensory integration (SI) by pediatric occupational
therapy practitioners in a rural midwestern state

Design: An exploratory mixed methods study, comprised of both qualitative and quantitative data collection and demographic questions.

Setting: The electronic survey was distributed to a convenience sample of pediatric occupational practitioners (OTPs) working in interdisciplinary settings across a rural midwestern state. Settings included: outpatient, inpatient, school-based, and early intervention (EI).

Participants: Seventy-seven OTPs completed and submitted the anonymous electronic survey. Inclusion criteria included pediatric occupational therapists or occupational therapy assistants working in an interdisciplinary setting, who were licensed to practice in the state at that time. Exclusion criteria included no experience in pediatrics, professionals other than occupational therapists or occupational therapy assistants and
practitioners in other rural states outside the catchment area.

Interventions: An descriptive mixed methods exploratory survey was distributed to OTPs across the midwestern state that remained open for a two-month period.

Main Outcome Measures: The survey consisted of 14 quantitative and qualitative data collection questions and 7 demographic questions. Questions
included Likert scale, multiple choice, yes/no, and open-ended questions.

Results: A Pearson correlation coefficient was calculated demonstrating correlations spanning from weak to moderate levels. Negative correlation results indicate OTPs with fewer years of experience were more likely not to agree that sensory integration is a valuable piece of occupational therapy intervention; practitioners with fewer years of experience were correlated with SI terms being interchangeable; OTPs in school-based and EI settings negatively correlated with SI not being an important piece of occupational therapy intervention. Positive correlation results highlight the disparities that exist in practitioners' understandings of SI theory, especially in practitioners with varying years of experience with the more years of experience correlates with better understanding of SI and the settings in which the practitioner is working indicating increased use of EBP SI interventions in outpatient settings vs decreased use of EBP SI in school-based settings.

Conclusions: A range of understanding and use of sensory integration theory among pediatric occupational therapy practitioners was indicated by the findings.
Further study is needed to consider implications of these findings for clients. Future studies may include exploring the use of sensory integration as related to setting, exploration of rigor of sensory integration education and training, and assessing effect of interventions to increase practitioner awareness of sensory integration as a potential contributor treatment planning.

Author(s) Disclosures: None