Child Sensory Profile 2 User%27s Manual

€77.15

This video provides an overview of the Sensory Profile-3 assessment typically used with individuals with sensory integrative dysfunction. 2 Profile Components The Adolescent/Adult Sensory Profileconsists of a User’s Manual and a Self Questionnaire, with a Summary Score Sheet included in the Self Questionnaire. The User’s Manual contains information about the rationale, theory, and development of the Adolescent/Adult Sensory Profile. The Sensory Profile™ provides a standard method for professionals to measure the sensory processing abilities of children 5 to 10 years old (separate cut scores for 3 and 4 year olds are provided in the manual) and to profile the effects of sensory processing on functional performance in the children’s daily lives. The Sensory Profileis a.

Description

Product Description

The Sensory Profile™ 2 family of assessments provides you with standardised tools to help evaluate a child’s sensory processing patterns in the context of home, school and community-based activities.

These significantly revised questionnaires evaluate a child’s unique sensory processing patterns from a position of strengths, providing deeper insight to help you customise the next steps of intervention. The forms are completed by caregivers and teachers, who are in the strongest position to observe the child’s response to sensory interactions that occur throughout the day.

Recommended Uses

The Sensory Profile 2 helps you:

Identify and document how sensory processing may be contributing to or interfering with a child’s participation at home, school, and the community
Contribute valuable information to a comprehensive assessment of the child’s sensory strengths and challenges in context
Develop effective treatment plans, interventions, and everyday remediation strategies.

Using paper and pencil or online administration with Q-global, caregivers and teachers report on the child’s response to sensory events throughout the day using the relevant forms.

Infant Sensory Profile 2: Caregiver questionnaire for babies from Birth–6 months
Toddler Sensory Profile 2: Caregiver questionnaire for toddlers ages 7–35 months
Child Sensory Profile 2: Caregiver questionnaire for children ages 3–14 years
Short Sensory Profile 2: Caregiver questionnaire for children ages 3–14 years. Items on this questionnaire, which are drawn from the Child Sensory Profile 2, are highly discriminating and provide quick information for screening and research programs
School Companion Sensory Profile 2: Teacher questionnaire for students ages 3–14 years.

Each form includes some combination of Sensory System, Behavioural, and Sensory Pattern scores:

Sensory System scores: Auditory, Visual, Touch, Movement, Body Position, Oral.
Behaviour scores: Conduct, Social-Emotional, Attentional.
Sensory Pattern scores: Seeking, Avoiding, Sensitivity, Registration.
School Factor scores: School Factor 1 (Supports), School Factor 2 (Awareness), School Factor 3 (Tolerance), School Factor 4 (Availability) (School Companion Sensory Profile 2 only).

Features & benefits

Combined questionnaire and score forms, no need to purchase separate forms
Expanded age range in one kit—The Child, Short, and School Companion forms age increased to 14:11, giving you more flexibility in assessing preteens and younger teens
Shorter questionnaires — The Infant, Child, School Companion, and Short form caregiver and teacher questionnaires are briefer. The Toddler questionnaire increased by just a few items, reflecting increased understanding of sensory processing at this age
Updated content and greater item consistency between forms
No need to purchase separate kits with Infant, Toddler, Child, Short, and School Companion forms combined in to one manual
Provides cuts scores with optional percentiles for an additional level of analysis
Online or paper-and-pencil administration and scoring to fit with your workflow
Wide range of studies between children with and without disabilities to ensure discrimination with vulnerable populations
Enables theory-based decision-making because principles of neuroscience, sensory processing, strengths-based approaches, and ecological models are imbedded in the items and scoring structure
Presents a comprehensive view of a child’s responses across settings, which helps facilitate discussion between families and professionals about strategies that support the child’s participation in all contexts
Enhanced reporting options to link findings from the questionnaires to participation at home, in school, and the community
Offers you an evidence-based tool that is built on extensive evidence from the first editions of the Sensory Profile™, including international research demonstrating the usefulness of data
Enhanced reporting options to link findings from the questionnaires to participation at home, in school, and the community.

Scoring & Reporting

Child Sensory Profile 2 User 27s Manual Pdf

Enhanced online scoring and reporting options include:

Assessment and Planning Report: To link the findings from the questionnaires to participation at home, in school, and in the community.
Multi-rater Report: Facilitating sensory processing assessment in context.
Manual entry: Option to use paper forms to administer the questionnaires, then use the Q-global system to score and generate reports.

Psychometric Information:

Child Sensory Profile 2 User 27s Manual Free

Data was collected on a nationally representative US sample of 1791 children from 2012 to 2013
774 children with disabilities participated in clinical validity studies including Autism and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)
Validation studies with gold standard measures of behaviour, adaptive behaviour and participation

*Note: Sensory Profile 2 has been developed with US normative data. Users should interpret assessment findings accordingly.

Complete Set €312.30 & Vat

Child Sensory Profile 2 User 27s Manual Download

Adding a brief behavioral function assessment enables pediatric occupational therapists to apply sensory strategies that better help youth with complex behavioral challenges.Integrating the QABF and Sensory Profile 2 (Dunn, 2014) assessment can improve pediatric occupational therapy behavioral outcomes (McCall et al., 2016; Lydon et al., 2017). Sensory Integration Intervention is helpful for children and adolescents with complex behavioral challenges because it is one of very few things that they are motivated to do. Understanding the client’s sensory profile and the function or purpose of their most problematic behavior helps guide occupational therapy treatment.
A case study illustrates how combining the Short Sensory Profile and QABF guides integrated sensory and behavioral intervention. The client is a fifteen year old with a diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder and Intellectual Disability who bit and punched his parents and psychiatric hospital staff. Given the severity of his behavioral challenges my occupational therapy assessment included the “QABF” Questions About Behavior Function and Short Sensory Profile 2 assessments.
The “QABF” Questions About Behavior Function assessment is a quick and reliable parent/staff report rating scale that quickly identifies the reason that the client engages in problematic behavior. The OT identifies the client’s most problematic behavior and describes it objectively. The QABF then asks parents/staff to rate how frequently the client engages in the target behavior (see QABF sample below, included with the permission of Johnny Matson, Ph.D.).
I determined that this client’s most problematic target behavior was biting & punching. The client’s residential unit staff rated the frequency of the client’s use of biting & punching to achieve 25 possible reinforcers. By adding the total scores for each major function of behavior in the bottom row, the client’s highest scores show that the primary reasons for his biting and punching were Escape and Attention, respectively.
Because Escape and Attention were the primary functions of the client’s inappropriate behavior intervention involved consultation between his occupational, speech/language and mental health therapist to develop a communication and reinforcement system for appropriately requesting attention and to escape tasks. Based on the student’s individual abilities, the team decided that if the student said “no thank you” he would immediately get out of all demands. To avoid over use of the “no thank you” statement to avoid tasks, the amount of work required for receiving rewards was initially reduced by a third. It was also decided that if he approached staff and looked towards them he would immediately receive attention.
The Short Sensory Profile 2 was rated for the client by his residential unit staff. His scores indicated much more than others for sensory sensitivity and sensory seeking. These scores and his clinical observations showed a tendency to become hyper-reactive and not habituate or “get use to” sensory input, as well as sensory seeking of deep pressure touch input. His parents and hospital staff also reported a tendency to bite or hit so he could be restrained, an important contribution of sensory assessments sometimes missed by the QABF assessment.
Research supports that adolescents with a diagnosis of Autism Spectrum and Anxiety Disorder as well as significant sensory sensitivity, tend to be overwhelmed by sound and touch input related to a neurological tendency to not habituate to this stimuli (Green et al., 2016). It is also often clinically reported that some adolescents with Autism Spectrum and Anxiety Disorder act physically aggressive to obtain the deep pressure input of being physically restrained. The client’s Sensory Profile 2 results and clinical observations were integrated with the QABF results into his treatment by his occupational, speech/language and mental health therapist .
Whenever the client calmly approached the occupational therapist and said “hug” deep pressure was offered. Deep pressure was never given following hitting or punching, because this would have reinforced these inappropriate behaviors. Integrating the QABF and Sensory Profile 2 assessment enabled the team to implement sensory strategies that reinforced appropriate behavior (McCall et al., 2016; Lydon et al., 2017).
References
Dunn W. (2014). Sensory profile 2: User’s manual. Psych Corporation. www.sensoryprofile.com
Green, S. A., Hernandez, L., Bookheimer, S. Y., & Dapretto, M. (2016). Salience network connectivity in autism is related to brain and behavioral markers of sensory overresponsivity. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 55(7), 618-626.
Lydon, Helena, Olive Healy, and Ian Grey. “Comparison of behavioral intervention and sensory integration therapy on challenging behavior of children with autism.” Behavioral Interventions 32, no. 4 (2017): 297-310.
McCall, J., Derby, M. K., & McLaughlin, T. F. (2016). The effects of matching sensory profile results to functional analysis and preference assessment for the in home treatment of aberrant behaviors in two children with Autism Spectrum Disorders. International Journal of English and Education, 5(1), 368-390.
Vollmer, T. R., & Matson, J. L. (1995). User’s guide: Questions about behavioral function (QABF). Baton Rouge, LA: www.disabilityconsultants.org