Table 7: Sensory integration therapy in ASD.

Author Year Type and duration of study Sample size Type of intervention ComparatorsDose Outcome measureFindings Comments

Fazlioglu and Baran [72]2008Randomized, parallel group  
12 weeks
(M 24; F 6)  
Age: 7–11 years
Sensory diet consisting of brushing and joint compression followed by activities liked by the child and integrated in the daily routine ()Control ()24  
45-min sessions (2 days a week)
Checklist developed by the investigators to quantify severity of sensory processing abnormalitiesSignificant improvement in treatment groupSmall sample size  
Blinding not reported  
Not standardized outcome measure  
No sufficient information on treatment and control activities

Pfeiffer et al. [73]2011Randomized, single blind, parallel group  
Duration: 6 weeks
(M 32; F 5)  
Age: 6–12 years  
Diagnosis of ASD only in 21 patients
Sensory integration according to Parham ()Fine motor control group ()18 45-minute sessionsSPM, SRS, GAS, and QNST-IISignificant improvement in mannerism and in GAS score in sensory group compared to fine motor activitySmall sample size  
High drop-out rate (almost 10%)  
Only per-protocol analysis  
Baseline characteristics different at baseline between the two groups  
QNTS-II not available for 30% of subjects in both groups

Reilly et al. [74]1983Randomized, crossover  
Duration: unclear, probably all sessions were provided in one day
(M 15; F 3)  
Age: 6.2–11.7 years
Sensory integrationFine motor activities (puzzle)Two 30 min sessions ASIEPSignificant difference in variety of speech and length of utterances favoring fine motor activitySmall sample size  
No standardized sensory integration therapy

Thompson [75]2011Open label  
Duration: unclear
(M 26; F 24)  
Age: not reported  
Diagnosis of ASD only in 10 patients
Sensory integration according to ParhamNoneSustained focus based on observationSignificant improvement in sustained focus in patients with ASDSmall sample size  
Not specific for autism  
Open label trial  
Data collectors not blinded  
Statistical analysis not optimal  
No standardized outcome measure  
Insufficient baseline data

ASIEP, Autism Screening Instrument for Educational Planning; GAS, Goal Attainment Scale; QNST-II, Quick Neurological Screening Test-II; SPM, Sensory Processing Measure; SRS, Social Responsiveness Scale.