Prevalence of dysfunction in sensory integration in kindergarten children
Abstract
Background Children with dysfunction in sensory integration(DSI) have difficulty effectively and efficiently interacting with
their environment. It has been estimated that 5 to 10% ofchildren
without disabilities have DSI. Late assessment and intervention
in children with this problem may significantly impact further
development. To date, there is no available data on DSI prevalence
in Indonesian children, which is crucial for better understanding
of the DSI burden in the community.
Objective To estimate the prevalence of DSI in North Jakarta
children using standardized screening tools.
Methods Parents of kindergarten children from two private
schools in N orth Jakarta were given questionnaire packets
including the Family Information Questionnaire and Winnie Dunn's
Short Sensory Profile (SSP) to assess demographic data and parents'
perceptions of their children with regards to DSI.
Results Of 264 questionnaire packets distributed, 117 packets
were returned (44.3%). Most children were of Chinese ethnicity
and aged 3 to 5 years. Of the 117 children, 49 children ( 41.9%)
met the criteria for DSI (definite difference), 33 children (28.2%)
were in the probable difference category for DSI, and 35 children
(29.9%) were in the category of typical performance. The scores for
the parameters of under-responsive and visual/auditory sensitivity
were the most commonly observed in subjects in the definite
difference category. From all questionnaire packets, a total of
18.56% of children in selected kindergartens in North Jakarta
met the screening criteria for DSI, while an additional 12.5%
were likely to have the disorder.
Conclusion Based on parental reports, we find that 18.56% of
children from two private kindergartens in North Jakarta had
DSI, while an additional 12.5% are likely to have the disorder.
References
hidden sensory challenges. 25th ed. Los Angeles: Western
Psychological Services; 2005. p. 4-38.
2. Kandel ER, Schwartz JH, Jessel TM. Principles of neural
science. 4th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2000. p. 3 18-381.
3. Nass RD. The neurologic examination of the young child.
In: David RB, Bodensteiner JB, Mandelbaum DE, Olson BJ,
editors. Clinical Pediatric Neurology. 3ro ed. New York: Demos
Medical Publishing; 2008. p. 45-55 .4. Miller LJ, Lane SJ. Toward a consensus in terminology in
sensory integration theory and practice. Part 1: Taxonomy
of neurophysiological processes. Sensory integration special
interest section quarterly. 2000;23:l--4.
5. Bundy AC, Murray EA Sensory integration: A Jean Ayres'
theory revisited. In: Bundy AC, Lane SJ, Murray EA,
editors. Sensory integration: Theory and practice. 2nd ed.
Philadelphia: F.A. Davis; 2002. p. 3-33.
6. Reeves GD. From neuron to behavior: Regulation arousal,
and attention as important substrate for the process of sensory
intergration. In Roley SS, Blanche EI, Schaaf RC, editors.
Understanding the nature of sensory integration with diverse
populations. San Antonio, TX: Therapy Skill Builders; 2001.
p. 89-108.
7. Lane SJ, Miller LJ, Hanft BE. Toward a consensus in
terminology in sensory integration theory and practice: Part
2: Sensory integration patterns of function and dysfunction.
Sensory integration special interest section quarterly.
2000;23: 1-3.
8. Ahn RR, Miller LJ, Milberger S, Mcintosh DN. Prevalence
of parents' perceptions of sensory processing disorders among
kindergarten children. Am. J Occup Ther. 2004;58:287-
93.
9. McIntosh DN, Miller LJ, Shyu V, Dunn W. Overview of
the short sensory profile (SSP) . In: Dunn W, editor. The
sensory profile: examiner's manual. San Antonio, TX: The
Psychological Corporation; 1999. p. 59-73.
10. The Psychological Corporation. Short Sensory Profile. [cited
2013 May 27]. Available from: http://www.vsb.bc.ca/sites/
default/ fil es/schoolfiles/Programs/Short%20Sen sory%20
Profile.pd£.
11. University of Kansas Medical Center. Sensory profile
(3-10 years): Explanation of scores. [cited 2012 July 16].
Available from: http://classes .kumc.edu/sah/resources/
sensory _processing/learning-opportunities/sensory profile2/
sensory_profile2 main.htm.
12. Statictics Indonesia. Hasil Sensus Penduduk 2000. Berita
Resmi Statistik. 2002:26:1-11.
13. Ministry of Health Republic oflndon esia. Indonesia country
profile 2007. Jakarta: Ministry of Health Republic of
Indonesia; 2008. p. 8.
14. Sontosudarmo A , Tukiran. Keragaman etnis dalam
pengelolaan wilayah. In: Hartono, Sudibyakto, Susanto
A, Sutikno, Woro S, Sukamdi, editor. Menuju pengelolaan
sumber daya wilayah berbasis ekosistem untuk mereduksi
potensi konflik antar daerah. Yogyakarta: Fakultas Geografi
UGM; 2003. p. 119-29.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Accepted 2016-08-21
Published 2013-08-31