Sensory Modulation Disorder: The Parent–Child Phenotype Association and Its Manifestations

PURPOSE: Clinical experience indicates a familial presence of sensory modulation disorder (SMD), but this has been scarcely studied within families, and a child–parent phenotype association has not yet been explored. SMD has a high comorbidity with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and although the effect of both disorders on daily life is well documented among children, no such report on parents of children with SMD was found. Therefore, the goals of this study were (1) to delineate the SMD parent–child phenotype relationship and (2) to characterize the ADHD, SMD, and quality of life (QoL) relationships in parents of children with SMD.

DESIGN: This is a cross-sectional study using a convenience sample. Thirty-two children ages 4–6 yr and their parents (N = 64) participated in the study. The study group comprised parents (n = 24) of children with SMD awaiting occupational therapy admission (n = 12). The control group included parents (n = 40) of typical children without SMD (n = 20).

METHOD: Children’s data were obtained by parent report using the Short Sensory Profile, an ADHD questionnaire based on DSM–IV criteria, and the Participation in Childhood Occupations Questionnaire. Parents’ data were obtained using self-report questionnaires including the Sensory Responsiveness Questionnaire–Intensity scale, the Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale (ASRS), and the World Health Organization Quality of Life Questionnaire. Nonparametric statistical analyses were performed using Mann–Whitney U tests for group differences and Spearman rank-order correlations.

RESULTS: SMD was found in 58% of mothers in the study group and in 5% of the mothers in the control group. However, only 16.7% of fathers in the study group, as well as 30% in the control group, were found to have SMD. SMD and ADHD were strongly correlated among children with SMD (r = .87, p < .001) and among mothers as well (r = .70, p < .001). SMD was significantly correlated with QoL, and parents of children with SMD reported significantly lower QoL than control group parents (mothers, in physical [p = .004] and mental [p = .04] measures; fathers, in physical [p = .005], mental [p = .02], and environmental [p = .009] measures). The strongest predictor found for parents’ QoL (of the following: parents’ SMD, children’s SMD, children’s ADHD, and parents’ ADHD) was parents’ ADHD score; ASRS scores predicted mothers’ physical (R ² = 0.43) and mental (R ² = 0.42) QoL and fathers’ physical (R ² = 0.33) and mental (R ² = 0.40) QoL.

CONCLUSION: SMD phenotype relationships within families were found to be statistically significant between children and their mothers but not their fathers. This finding was not previously reported and may serve for both prevention therapy and research on SMD underlying mechanisms. Interestingly, parents’ QoL was found to be most affected by their own ADHD level.

IMPACT STATEMENT: Because QoL in parents of children with SMD was found to be reduced, occupational therapists may embrace new therapeutic modalities for parents of children with SMD aiming at ameliorating parents’ QoL, which may impact family well-being. Further research is warranted in order to establish the familial association and manifestations in SMD.

References

Bar-Shalita, T., & Cermak, S. A. (2016). Atypical sensory modulation and psychological distress in the general population. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 70, 1–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2016.018648

Bar-Shalita, T., Vatine, J. J., & Parush, S. (2008). Sensory modulation disorder: A risk factor for participation in daily life activities. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 50, 932–937. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.2008.03095.x