Posted on Leave a comment

Coffee and Chat: Ayres’ SI and Learning Disabilities

Tonight’s Coffee and Chat is all about Ayres’ SI and Learning Disabilities with special guest working in the field of learning disabilities across the lifespan.

Come and Listen to our practising therapists and experts explore assessment tools, the role of consultation and how to deliver services that draw on the theory and practice of Ayres’ Sensory Integration.

Join us tonight 3 March 2021 at 7.30pm.

Book your FREE place now on Eventbrite.

Read about the application of Ayres’ SI in Learning Disabilities on this reference and reading list below.

Papers here include from therapists, Ros Urwin, whose Master’s in 2005  was the first UK study to investigate ASI with adults with learning disabilities in the UK, our colleague Rachel Daniels, whose work in this field was the focus of a research project and Ciara McGill, who we had the pleasure to teach on the journey that led to her Master’s Study publication with Ulster University.

  1. Cahill, S.M. and J. Pagano. 2015. Reducing restraint and seclusion: the benefit and role of occupational therapy. American Occupational Therapy Association.

  2. Champagne, T. and N. Stromberg. 2004. Sensory approaches in an-patient psychiatric settings: Innovative alternatives to seclusion and restraint. Journal of Psychosocial Nursing 42(9): 35–44.

  3. Daniels, R. 2015. Community occupational therapy for learning disabilities: The process of providing Ayres sensory integration therapy and approaches to this population. Birmingham: European Sensory Integration Conference. www.iceasi-org

  4. Department of Health. 2012a. Department of Health review: Winterbourne View hospital interim report. London: Department of Health.

  5. Department of Health. 2012b. Transforming care: A national response to Winterbourne View Hospital: Department of Health review final report. London: Department of Health.

  6. Department of Health. 2014. Positive and proactive care: reducing the need for restrictive interventions. London: Department of Health.

  7. Gay, J. 2012. Positive solutions in practice: using sensory focused activities to help reduce restraint and seclusion. Victoria: Office of the Senior Practitioner.

  8. Green, D., Beaton, L., Moore, D., Warren, L., Wick, V., Sanford, J. E., & Santosh, P. (2003). Clinical Incidence of Sensory Integration Difficulties in Adults with Learning Disabilities and Illustration of Management. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 66(10), 454–463

  9. Lillywhite, A. and D. Haines. 2010. Occupational therapy and people with learning disabilities: Findings from a research study. London: College of Occupational Therapists.

  10. Leong, H. M., Carter, M., & Stephenson, J. (2015). A systematic review of sensory integration therapy for individuals with disabilities: Single case design studies. Research in developmental disabilities, 47, 334–351.

  11. McGill, C & Breen, C. 2020. Can sensory integration have a role in the multi‐element behavioural intervention? An evaluation of factors associated with the management of challenging behaviour in community adult learning disability services. British Journal of Learning Disabilities.

  12. Royal College of Psychiatrists. 2013. People with a learning disability and mental health, behavioural or forensic problems: The role of inpatient services. London: Royal College of Psychiatrists.

  13. Transforming Care and Commissioning Steering Group. 2014. Winterbourne View – Time for change: Transforming the commissioning of services for people with learning disabilities [Bubb Report]. London: NHS England.

  14. Urwin, R., & Ballinger, C. (2005). The Effectiveness of Sensory Integration Therapy to Improve Functional Behaviour in Adults with Learning Disabilities: Five Single-Case Experimental Designs. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 68(2), 56–66. 

sensory integration leanring disabilities Ciara McGIll
Ciara McGill, Occupational Therapist

Click to access Reducing-Restraint-and-Seclusion-20150218.pdf

The effectiveness of sensory integration therapy to improve functional behaviour in adults with learning disabilities: five single-case experimental designs

Urwin, Rosalind and Ballinger, Claire (2005) The effectiveness of sensory integration therapy to improve functional behaviour in adults with learning disabilities: five single-case experimental designs. British Journal of Occupational Therapy68 (2)56-66.
 

Abstract

This paper describes a research project using a single-case experimental design (A-B-A), which aimed to explore the impact of sensory integration therapy (SIT) on level of engagement and maladaptive behaviour (measured through timed scores) and function (using Goal Attainment Scaling, GAS) for five learning disabled adults with tactile sensory modulation disorder.

Each phase lasted 4 weeks and consisted of 24 measurements in total. Individually tailored SIT was given twice weekly for 4 weeks during the intervention phase (B), immediately prior to each individual’s participation in his or her prescribed horticulture task. The changes between phases in engagement, maladaptive behaviours and function scores, measured as the difference between baselines and intervention, were analysed visually and statistically for each participant.

The intervention produced significant improvements in engagement for participant four, with a highly significant deterioration in scores for all five participants on withdrawal of SIT. All the participants’ maladaptive behaviour decreased significantly on the introduction of SIT. Although there was no significant change to GAS scores for four participants, participant four’s score improved significantly with SIT. The withdrawal of SIT resulted in a highly significant deterioration in GAS scores for participants one, two, four and five. This study may be the first to suggest that SIT is effective in improving functional performance in adults with a learning disability with a tactile sensory modulation disorder.

Click to access Resource-OT-and-Learning-Disabilities_0.pdf

Posted on Leave a comment

Research into Practice: A study of safety and tolerability of rotatory vestibular input for preschool children

The answer to a question on SI4OT, a FB group for OT’s curated by our social media team, includes this interesting article.

This study was focussing on the vestibular system, and the researchers tried to work out the exact amount of vestibular input needed in therapy. The results strongly suggest that it is very individualised and requires direct therapist observation to know. This is exactly in line with Ayres’ teachings. There is no exact amount that can be prescribed

A study of safety and tolerability of rotatory vestibular input for preschool children

The use of sensory input to support function, health and wellbeing is an art and a science.

The science is knowing for instance that habituation of tactile input to Ruffini nerve ending is usually fairly rapid – eg light touch as we put arms in shirt sleeves while habituation to pain receptors will vary a lot and maybe ongoing after tissue damage we can’t always see.

The art is that our response to sensory input to sensory systems will vary greatly and is very individualised. This response is not just linked to immediate registration and perception of the input – meaning and memory need to be considered too.  Think about happy smells and songs that stay in your head all day. Think too about the response to trauma when a person smells their abuser’s perfume.

There is no recipe for how much to give and when. This is the art and science of ASI. So many factors impact on what a person needs and when to have an adaptive response.

This is why sensory input is not just something you can prescribe someone by saying;

“Give Jane 20 mins on a swing 3x a day” 

gray swing

Essential to practice is the person’s response to sensory input – Do they have an adaptive response?

“Ayres (1972b) described the adaptive response as central to praxis intervention. Adaptive responses are purposeful actions directed toward a goal that is successfully achieved, and the production of adaptive responses is thought to be inherently organizing for the brain. Ayres (1972b, 1985) further emphasized that SI intervention was a transaction among client, task, and environment.”

Bundy, A. and Lane, S. [2019], Sensory Integration Theory and Practice, 3rd Edition, [Philadelphia]. Available from: FADavis.

Watching and seeing this response to input, alongside feedback from the parents/family/person is what we do to understand each person’s unique responses and pattern. However, knowing and remembering that many things can impact on this, day to day and even minute by minute is essential. 

 

Posted on 1 Comment

Question: If I do the ASI WISE CLASI CASI programme, do I call myself a Practitioner or Advanced Practitioner?

“I am an OT and I’m interested in becoming an ASI Practitioner with your programme? What does ICEASI Level 2 mean and is it the same as other Practitioner and Advanced Practitioner courses? What do I call myself on completion of the ASI Wise CLASI CASI Programme, Practitioner or Advanced Practitioner as some of my colleagues have done Advanced Practitioner training and can’t see the difference? Thank you. Jo.”

Hi Jo

Thank you for your question. I would suggest that you describe or sign yourself on reports as

Jo Blogs

Occupational Therapist with Certification in Ayres’ Sensory Integration (ICEASI Level 2).

This would clearly describe your profession, while also describing your training in Ayres’ Sensory Integration to be able to know and understand the neuroscience and theory, be able to provide comprehensive assessment including with standardised norm-referenced tools, able to use clinical reasoning to develop a hypothesis to support intervention planning, delivery and measurement of progress/outcomes in line with ICEASI Level 2 Certificate level Outcomes.

Compentancy in SI
©ICEASI 2017 in Mori et al 2017, AOTA OTP Volume 22 Issue 12 p 8 – 13.

Not all terms used abroad are the same as here in the UK or Ireland. Practitioner and Advanced Practitioner refer to terms historically used and linked to a specific programme. At international meetings, representatives from many international organisations have tried to establish an international standard for education in ASI. Programmes that meet criteria for ICEASI Level 2 will equate to a therapist having learnt and applied knowledge and skills to assess, interpret and clinically reason to practice – being able to provide and reflect on intervention using the principles of Ayres’ SI.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Our Directors; Amanda Adamson, Kath Smith and Ros Urwin have been meeting up and collaborating with colleagues from across the globe at international conferences and forums. For many years, they have represented ASI education in the UK and Ireland, actively contributing to the development of the learning standards. Read more here

Completion of ASI WISE’s CLASI CASI modular programme will mean therapists are grounded in, know and understand seminal theory and history of ASI and are aware of and can apply current research and evidence in practice, meeting ICEASI Level 2 criteria.

This will include the ability to understand in detail, use and apply a wide range of assessment tools and methods to clinically reason how to provide intervention to anyone of any age and in any clinical setting; including how to use and interpret the current “gold standard tool” the SIPT (Sensory Integration and Praxis Test), with learning about a new test in development the EASI (Evaluation of Ayres’ Sensory Integration).

Please see our shop for more information about our modules and other workshops supporting the learning of therapists wanting to practice Ayres’ Sensory Integration.

You can read more about feedback about our workshops and courses on our pages.