McKinney T1, Mosley B1, Hall R1, Rush S1, Peterson A1
1Turn Center, Amarillo, United States
Background: Rising awareness and prevalence of Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASDs) has led to demand for improvement in treatment strategies and exploration for more effective therapeutic options to improve pediatric quality of life.
Purpose: To compare the outcomes of a strictly land-based physical therapy approach versus a physical therapy approach that includes aquatic therapy in the treatment of ASDs.
Methods: An IRB-approved prospective, randomized and controlled clinical study design was used to recruit children ages 3 to 12 presenting with DSM V diagnosis of ASD or clinical suspicion of ASD that are treatment naïve to previous aquatic therapy. All enrolled participants were randomized to receive either observation without aquatic therapy intervention (control group) or standardized Swim Whisperers© aquatic therapy (study group) while both continuing on with any existing land-based therapies. The aquatic therapy was given forty five minutes weekly for a total of 10 weeks. Study population characteristics and various outcome measures were collected and compared among both arms of the trial at baseline and at the conclusion of the 10 week intervention period. The main outcome variable consisted of change in the PedsQLTM pediatric quality of life inventory.
Results: The study included a total of 22 participants: eleven children in the treatment group that received 10 weeks of the aquatic therapy intervention and eleven age and gender-matched control children that received no changes in therapy over the 10 week study interval. There were no significant differences at baseline in any of the demographics or study characteristics among the two groups. The study group showed statistically significant improvement (p=0.0433) when compared to the control group in change of global PedsQLTM score over the 10 week study period (+8.8 [1.1 to 16.4] versus -2.1 [-9.3 to 5.1]; [95% Confidence Intervals]). Notably, the aquatic intervention children showed the most improvement in Emotional Functioning (p=0.0317) and Social Functioning (p=0.0062), but there were no significant changes in Physical Functioning (p=0.2264) or School Functioning (p=0.0930) compared to the control arm of the study. Only one child that received the aquatic therapy failed to improve on the global PedsQLTM score.
Conclusion(s): Aquatic therapy shows promising outcomes for children with ASD's regarding improvement in both emotional and social functioning when used as an adjunct to traditional therapies. Future investigations with longer term follow-up are necessary to validate these findings and to determine the optimal treatment regimen.
Implications: Children with ASD's that are struggling with conventional physical therapy and other interventions may additionally benefit from aquatic therapy. Simplified aquatic training courses are becoming more readily available to physical therapists which, in turn, will allow for improved access and viability for aquatic therapy as adjunctive treatment option for many autistic children.
Keywords: Austism Spectrum Disorders, Aquatic Therapy
Funding acknowledgements: None.
Purpose: To compare the outcomes of a strictly land-based physical therapy approach versus a physical therapy approach that includes aquatic therapy in the treatment of ASDs.
Methods: An IRB-approved prospective, randomized and controlled clinical study design was used to recruit children ages 3 to 12 presenting with DSM V diagnosis of ASD or clinical suspicion of ASD that are treatment naïve to previous aquatic therapy. All enrolled participants were randomized to receive either observation without aquatic therapy intervention (control group) or standardized Swim Whisperers© aquatic therapy (study group) while both continuing on with any existing land-based therapies. The aquatic therapy was given forty five minutes weekly for a total of 10 weeks. Study population characteristics and various outcome measures were collected and compared among both arms of the trial at baseline and at the conclusion of the 10 week intervention period. The main outcome variable consisted of change in the PedsQLTM pediatric quality of life inventory.
Results: The study included a total of 22 participants: eleven children in the treatment group that received 10 weeks of the aquatic therapy intervention and eleven age and gender-matched control children that received no changes in therapy over the 10 week study interval. There were no significant differences at baseline in any of the demographics or study characteristics among the two groups. The study group showed statistically significant improvement (p=0.0433) when compared to the control group in change of global PedsQLTM score over the 10 week study period (+8.8 [1.1 to 16.4] versus -2.1 [-9.3 to 5.1]; [95% Confidence Intervals]). Notably, the aquatic intervention children showed the most improvement in Emotional Functioning (p=0.0317) and Social Functioning (p=0.0062), but there were no significant changes in Physical Functioning (p=0.2264) or School Functioning (p=0.0930) compared to the control arm of the study. Only one child that received the aquatic therapy failed to improve on the global PedsQLTM score.
Conclusion(s): Aquatic therapy shows promising outcomes for children with ASD's regarding improvement in both emotional and social functioning when used as an adjunct to traditional therapies. Future investigations with longer term follow-up are necessary to validate these findings and to determine the optimal treatment regimen.
Implications: Children with ASD's that are struggling with conventional physical therapy and other interventions may additionally benefit from aquatic therapy. Simplified aquatic training courses are becoming more readily available to physical therapists which, in turn, will allow for improved access and viability for aquatic therapy as adjunctive treatment option for many autistic children.
Keywords: Austism Spectrum Disorders, Aquatic Therapy
Funding acknowledgements: None.
Topic: Paediatrics
Ethics approval required: Yes
Institution: Salus IRB
Ethics committee: Board 1
Ethics number: IRB00006833
All authors, affiliations and abstracts have been published as submitted.
