1987
DOI: 10.5014/ajot.41.2.81
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects of Adaptive Seating Devices on the Eating and Drinking of Children With Multiple Handicaps

Abstract: The purpose of this study was to explore the effects of adaptive seating on oral-motor functioning as it relates to eating and drinking in 11 children with multiple handicaps between the ages of 1 and 4 years. An assessment instrument with a behavioral base was used for the seven direct observations of each child's motor behavior. During the first and last visit the parent or guardian filled out a pre- and post-equipment questionnaire. Evaluations were conducted every 6 weeks beginning 3 months before and endi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
24
0

Year Published

1994
1994
2008
2008

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 46 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
1
24
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These studies showed adaptive seating to improve sitting posture, 18 vocalisation 19 and oral motor eating skills. 20 The studies did not show an effect of adaptive seating on visual tracking, 18 self-feeding 20 or drinking skills. 20 Roxborough 12 concluded that studies with stronger designs and valid outcome measures are necessary for definitive answers about the effects of adaptive seating compared with unsupported sitting, and to determine the specific features of adaptive seating required to achieve the desired outcomes.…”
Section: Adapted Seating For Children With Cpmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…These studies showed adaptive seating to improve sitting posture, 18 vocalisation 19 and oral motor eating skills. 20 The studies did not show an effect of adaptive seating on visual tracking, 18 self-feeding 20 or drinking skills. 20 Roxborough 12 concluded that studies with stronger designs and valid outcome measures are necessary for definitive answers about the effects of adaptive seating compared with unsupported sitting, and to determine the specific features of adaptive seating required to achieve the desired outcomes.…”
Section: Adapted Seating For Children With Cpmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…Other studies demonstrated that following proper positioning, feeding improved immediately. This was due to better food retention, rather than a change in oral-motor skills [2,7]. We have suggested that better food/liquid retention following intraoral appliance therapy may have contributed to children's ability to maintain their growth trajectory at a time when a weight "lag down" was expected [27].…”
Section: Role Of Positioning For Feedingmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…Interaction with the physical [1][2][3][4][5][6] and social environment [7,8] is thereby facilitated. However, only few studies address the significance of positioning for feeding [7,9,10].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Occupational therapy for children with CP 13 Multidisciplinary, outcome measures not included in review Case-Smith 22 Participants with CP and other diseases Colbert 23 Outcome measures not included in review Crawford 24 Outcome measures not included in review Damle 25 Outcome measures not included in review Fetters 26 Outcome measures not included in review Fisher 27 Participants with CP and other diseases Hankinson 28 Outcome measures not included in review Hasdai 29 Participants with CP and other diseases Hulme 30 Participants with CP and other diseases Hulme 31 Participants with CP and other diseases Manley 32 Outcome measures not included in review Palmer 33 Outcome measures not included in review Reid 34 Outcome measures not included in review Rennie 35 Participants with CP and other diseases Barnes 36 Single subject design Barnes 37 Single subject design Crocker 38 Single subject design Durfee 39 Single subject design Everson 40 Single subject design, outcome measures not included in review Goodman 41 Single subject design Hsieh 42 Single subject design Hulme 43 Single subject design, participants with CP and other diseases Kinghorn 44 Single subject design Lilly 45 Single subject design McCormack 46 Single subject design Reid 47 Single subject design Sakemiller 48 Single subject design Smiths 49 Single subject design Tona 50 Single subject design…”
Section: Appendix 1 -Criteria Of Methodological Qualitymentioning
confidence: 99%