Download the Journal (PDF) - Division on Autism and ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Instruments A questionnaire with four semi-structured questions and one open question was developed. The semi-structured questions focused on <strong>the</strong> use of a particular intervention for people with PIMD, and asked how many clients were offered this intervention (less than 30 clients in intervals of two and from 30 onwards in tens) if it had been used. We subsequently asked if (and if so, how often) <strong>the</strong> effect of this intervention was evaluated in writing. The open question asked which interventions not included in <strong>the</strong> list were also used in <strong>the</strong> specific setting. A manual was included which explained how to complete <strong>the</strong> questionnaire. Procedure Firstly, an inventory of interventions that were frequently recommended to practitioners in <strong>the</strong> Ne<strong>the</strong>rlands and <strong>the</strong> Flemish-speaking part of Belgium was made. This overview was based on information in practice-oriented journals and internet sites that target professionals involved in <strong>the</strong> support of people with profound intellectual disabilities. From this list, which contained 23 interventions, seven were omitted as <strong>the</strong>y were primarily designed for use by parents at home (such as Brain Net and Saito Therapy) or demanded specific situations and funding (such as Dolphin <strong>the</strong>rapy). Subsequently, <strong>the</strong> researchers asked health care psychologists to cooperate in ga<strong>the</strong>ring data. In <strong>the</strong> Dutch context, researchers informed health care psychologists working in <strong>the</strong> field by telephone, explaining <strong>the</strong> aim of <strong>the</strong> study and asking about <strong>the</strong>ir willingness to complete a questionnaire. In Belgium, health care psychologists working with those with PIMD were asked <strong>the</strong> same question during <strong>the</strong>ir biannual meeting. The questionnaire was mailed to those who consented. The list consisted of 16 interventions: Aroma<strong>the</strong>rapy (Diego, Jones, & Field, 1998), Basic Stimulation (Fröhlich, 1991), CranioSacral Therapy (Upledger & Vredevoogd, 1983), Discrete Trial Training (Lovaas, 1987), Gentle Teaching (McGee, 1992), Haptonomy (Veldman, 2003), Equine Therapy/Hippo<strong>the</strong>rapy (Ionatamamishvili, Tsverava, Loriya, Sheshaberidze, & Rukhadze, 2004), Mobility Opportunities Via Education (Bidabe & Lollar, 1990), Shantala Massage (Leboyer, 1987), Sensory Integrative Therapy (Ayers, 1972), Sherborne Developmental Movement (Loots & Malschaert, 1999), Snoezelen (Hulsegge & Verheul, 1987), Tibetan Cymbals (Jansen, 1990), Therapeutic Touch (Courcey, 2001), Touch for Health (Thie, 2005) and Watsu Therapy (Dull, 1997). Only half of <strong>the</strong> facilities responded before <strong>the</strong> due date. Two weeks after <strong>the</strong> due date researchers sent a reminder and most responded <strong>the</strong>reafter, with <strong>the</strong> exception of three psychologists who could not be contacted even after several attempts, and a fur<strong>the</strong>r three that were no longer willing to participate due to lack of time. Data were analyzed using descriptive measures. Results 336 / Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities-September 2008 All facilities that participated use at least one (as was <strong>the</strong> case in two facilities) or more (with a maximum of eleven in one facility) <strong>the</strong>rapeutic interventions, with <strong>the</strong> exception of <strong>the</strong> respite care home. In this setting, none of <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>rapeutic interventions from our list is used and <strong>the</strong>refore it is excluded from <strong>the</strong> results. Two <strong>the</strong>rapeutic interventions, Mobility Opportunities via Education and Touch for Health, were not mentioned at all by <strong>the</strong> respondents and are also excluded from <strong>the</strong> tables. In Table 1, <strong>the</strong> number and percentage of <strong>the</strong> use of <strong>the</strong>se interventions in 47 settings are given. The table shows that some <strong>the</strong>rapeutic interventions are only offered in a limited number of settings. O<strong>the</strong>rs, such as Snoezelen and Sensory Integrative Therapy are offered in more than half of <strong>the</strong> participating settings. Snoezelen is used in 87.2% and is by far <strong>the</strong> most popular intervention. Some <strong>the</strong>rapeutic interventions are offered to a large number of clients in each setting. Gentle Teaching and Snoezelen are offered to a high number of clients at least once a week (120129 and 100109, respectively). O<strong>the</strong>rs, for example Discrete Trial Training, CranioSacral Therapy, and Therapeutic Touch are not offered to more than six clients per setting. Table 2 shows <strong>the</strong> ranges between <strong>the</strong> least number and highest number of clients
TABLE 1 Number of Facilities That Use Therapeutic Interventions that are offered a specific intervention at least once a week in a specific setting. We also inquired whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>rapeutic interventions were evaluated and if so, at what point. Table 3 shows that 65.3% of <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>rapeutic interventions used are clinically evalu- Residential Units Day Services Special Education Total NL (N 14) B (N 9) NL (N 11) B (N 2) NL (N 6) B (N 5) NL B (N 47) NL B (%) Aroma<strong>the</strong>rapy 3 5 3 1 3 15 31.9 Basic Stimulation 3 7 2 1 2 5 19 40.4 CranioSacral Therapy 1 1 2 4.3 Discrete Trial 1 1 2 4.3 Training Gentle Teaching 2 1 2 1 2 8 17.0 Haptonomy 5 1 1 8 17.0 Equine Therapy 6 4 7 1 3 21 44.7 S.I.T. 8 2 6 6 2 24 51.1 Shantala Massage 1 5 3 2 3 14 29.8 Sherborne 6 2 1 4 13 27.7 Snoezelen 9 9 11 2 5 5 41 87.2 Therapeutic Touch 1 1 2 4.3 Tibetan Cymbals 2 2 5 1 1 11 23.4 Watsu Therapy 3 3 6.4 TABLE 2 ated in writing, but in only 39.8% of <strong>the</strong>se cases does <strong>the</strong> evaluation follow directly after <strong>the</strong> intervention, or on <strong>the</strong> same day. Ano<strong>the</strong>r 3.5% of cases are evaluated weekly, <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r 56.6 % being evaluated less frequently (ei<strong>the</strong>r monthly, annually or even less often). The Ranges (Lowest-Highest) in Number of Clients Receiving Therapeutic Interventions Number of Settings Providing Treatment Form Least Number of Clients (Number of Settings) Highest Number of Clients (Number of Settings) Aroma<strong>the</strong>rapy 15 1–3 (2) 60–69 (1) Basic Stimulation 19 1–3 (2) 60–69 (1) CranioSacral Therapy 2 4–6 (1) 4–6 (1) Discrete Trial Training 2 1–3 (1) 1–3 (1) Gentle Teaching 8 1–3 (4) 120–129 (1) Haptonomy 8 4–6 (1) 13–15 (1) Equine Therapy 21 1–3 (3) 28–30 (1) S.I.T 24 1–3 (2) 10–12 (2) Shantala Massage 14 1–3 (4) 40–49 (1) Sherborne 13 1–3 (3) 16–18 (1) Snoezelen 41 1–3 (7) 100–109 (1) Therapeutic Touch 2 1–3 (1) 4–6 (1) Tibetan Cymbals 11 1–3 (2) 16–18 (1) Watsu Therapy 3 1–3 (1) 10–12 (2) Therapeutic Interventions / 337
Page 1 and 2:
Education and Training in Developme
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Self-Determination in Relation to H
Page 9 and 10:
ticipants (a) believed the<
Page 11 and 12:
Field notes were used to document <
Page 13 and 14: ling information, medical history a
Page 15 and 16: Home. Jack lived with his mo<strong
Page 17 and 18: we felt strongly that we needed inf
Page 19 and 20: literature, mostly to do with <stro
Page 21 and 22: tion? The national consumer survey.
Page 23 and 24: Figure 1. Proposed intersection of
Page 25 and 26: teaching in each program for five y
Page 27 and 28: also used to support and challenge
Page 29 and 30: Despite Paula’s description of an
Page 31 and 32: The paraprofessionals at Harborvill
Page 33 and 34: Figure 2. Resultant intersection of
Page 35 and 36: learning opportunities relevant to
Page 37 and 38: Bouck, E. C. (2005). Service delive
Page 39 and 40: Thirty Year Review of Safety Skill
Page 41 and 42: TABLE 1 Safety Skill Studies Refere
Page 43 and 44: TABLE 1—(Continued) Reference Par
Page 45 and 46: found differences only in efficienc
Page 47 and 48: skill for integrating persons with
Page 49 and 50: treatment of a burn) may take sever
Page 51 and 52: created video programs to teach stu
Page 53 and 54: and on-schedule behavior and decrea
Page 55 and 56: TABLE 1—(Continued) Author(s) Mor
Page 57 and 58: trums, aggression) in a four-year-o
Page 59 and 60: (Quill, 1995). Furthe</stro
Page 61 and 62: following picture prompt training.
Page 63: medication, for example anticonvuls
Page 67 and 68: Snoezelen on a variety of behaviors
Page 69 and 70: Kapell, D., Nightingale, B., Rodrig
Page 71 and 72: ity being on the c
Page 73 and 74: communication turns (i.e., initiati
Page 75 and 76: Definitions of Target Behaviors and
Page 77 and 78: student gave the p
Page 79 and 80: Figure 2. Bob’s performance data.
Page 81 and 82: contact increased 41% from baseline
Page 83 and 84: Figure 5. Eric’s performance data
Page 85 and 86: Figure 6. Jen’s performance data.
Page 87 and 88: to students with severe disabilitie
Page 89 and 90: The use of arm splints has been suc
Page 91 and 92: Figure 1. Intervention results for
Page 93 and 94: sions, he engaged in hand mouthing
Page 95 and 96: Effects of a Reciprocal Questioning
Page 97 and 98: 4-45). Because the
Page 99 and 100: TABLE 2 Codes of Student Question G
Page 101 and 102: TABLE 3 Examples of Elements of a S
Page 103 and 104: Figure 2. Self-monitoring checklist
Page 105 and 106: TABLE 4 Example Question Words, Thi
Page 107 and 108: Figure 4. Frequency of prompted and
Page 109 and 110: Figure 5. Frequency of unprompted s
Page 111 and 112: their children to
Page 113 and 114: and lack of random selection makes
Page 115 and 116:
prehension-monitoring activities. C
Page 117 and 118:
all three participants who passed b
Page 119 and 120:
TABLE 2 Leisure Activities Used in
Page 121 and 122:
papers were removed and the
Page 123 and 124:
was 68% (range 42% to 83%). In <str
Page 125 and 126:
Teaching Test-taking Strategies to
Page 127 and 128:
ing experiences beginning at <stron
Page 129 and 130:
short essay question. Items were ei
Page 131 and 132:
plication of the t
Page 133 and 134:
Figure 2. Percent correct on <stron
Page 135 and 136:
aseline probes, data were highly va
show all

Download the Journal (PDF) - Division on Autism and ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?