On-line version ISSN 2310-3833
Print version ISSN 0038-2337
S. Afr. j. occup. ther. vol.42 n.3 Pretoria 2012
Annamarie van JaarsveldI; Zoe MaillouxII; David S. HerzbergIII
IMOT (UFS). Head, Dept of Occupational Therapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, UFS
IIMA in Occupational Therapy (University of Southern California). Director of Administration, Pediatric Therapy Network
IIIPhD, Psychology (Clinical), (University of California), Senior Project Director, Western Psychological Services
BACKROUND: The Sensory Integration and Praxis Tests (SIPT) developed by A. Jean Ayres, are currently one of the best researched and scientifically sound measuring instruments available for detecting developmental problems based on sensory integration functions2,3. There is currently no instrument of the stature of the SIPT, available that is standardised on the South African (SA) population. The question that needed to be answered was whether the use of the SIPT on SA children was fair and just, since the SIPT is standardised on a sample of children from the United States (US).
METHODOLOGY: A quantitative, descriptive research design was used to investigate equivalency between the US normative data and a sample of typically developing SA children.
FINDINGS: This research indicated that 12 of the 17 test items of the SIPT can be scored against the normative sample of US children. There are however five tests within the older age bands (6y 0m - 8y 11m) on which the SA sample of children performed moderately to significantly better. This can cause SA children who do have sensory integration dysfunctions to go unidentified by the SIPT.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION: The scores of five of the tests of children in the older age bands must each be adapted with ½ a standard deviation unit to the negative side before clinical interpretation and reasoning are done by the occupational therapist.
Key words: Sensory Integration, SIPT, use on South African children
“Full text available only in PDF format”
1. Ayres A.J. Sensory Integration and Praxis Test Manual, updated edition. Eighth printing. Western Psychological Services, Los Angeles, 2004. [ Links ]
2. Bundy A.C., Lane, S.J. & Murray, E.A. Sensory Integration Theory and Practice. Second edition. FA Davis Company, Philadelphia, 2002. [ Links ]
3. Schaaf R.C., Smith Roley, S. Sensory Integration: Applying Clinical Reasoning to Practise with Diverse Populations. Pro-Ed, Texas, 2006. [ Links ]
4. Guidelines for good practise in the Health Care professions. Available at: http://www.hpcsa.co.za/downloads/conductethics/rules/generic_ethical_rules/booklet_1_guidelines_good_prac.pdf. Accessed November 11, 2011. [ Links ]
5. Ayres, A.J. Sensory Integration and Learning Disorders, Western psychological Services. Los Angeles, 1997. [ Links ]
6. Clark F In Foreword of Smith Roley S., Blanche E.I., Schaaf R.C. Sensory Integration with Diverse Populations. Therapy Skill Builders, US, 2001. [ Links ]
7. Smith Roley S., Blanche E.I., & Schaaf R.C. Sensory Integration with Diverse Populations. Therapy Skill Builders, US, 2001 [ Links ]
8. Cohen J. A Power Primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, p155-159, 1992. [ Links ]
9. Springer R. Using Effect Size in NSSE Survey Reporting. Research & Practice in Assessment. March 2006. Vol 1, Issue 1:3. www.virginiaassessment.org/rpa/1/Springer.pdf. Cited on 15/06/2010. [ Links ]
10. Biddix J. Effect Size, Uncomplicated Reviews of Educational Research Methods: Effect Size. http://researchrundowns.wordpress.com/quantitative-methods/effect-size/. Cited on 14/06/2010. [ Links ]
11. USC/WPS Instructor Meeting. Discussions held on the revision of the SIPT. Meeting held on 27/02/2011 at Marriot Hotel, Torrance, LA. [ Links ]
Annamarie van Jaarsveld