Randomized, controlled, peer-reviewed studies of OT efficacy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone point me to any randomized, controlled, peer-reviewed studies showing that occupational therapy is effective in treating sensory processing problems or fine motor delays in preschoolers? I work in research but can't seem to find these. Most of the studies I've located do not have research designs that enable observers to distinguish the effects of treatment from changes that would have occurred in children regardless as they matured. Are methodologically rigorous studies out there?

If there aren't, and you decided to go ahead and spend the money on OT, how did you make that decision? It seems like a ton of money to spend without being more sure about efficacy, but maybe worth doing because OT at least isn't harmful, and might help even if it hasn't been studied properly? TIA.

You search PubMed and narrow by population. However, you're over thinking. If your preschooler has fine motor delays then OT is pretty much all you can do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:However, you're over thinking. If your preschooler has fine motor delays then OT is pretty much all you can do.

I guess it depends on what you see as the opportunity cost of pursuing OT. If you have finite resources and you spend $10,000 on OT out of pocket, that's $10,000 you aren't spending on something else that could benefit your child. If OT doesn't have a major effect beyond what would occur anyway as the child matured, then you've wasted $10,000 that you could have spent on something else to help your child. In other words, if the effect of OT is the same as enrolling your child in gymnastics or encouraging her to play with Lego more, then there's a lot of families who could just do those things and then do something else useful with the remaining $9,500-- including other types of enrichment experiences or just plunking it into a 529, where it will easily compound into quite a bit more money that will for sure bring a benefit to the child someday.

The notion that "OT might help, won't hurt, doesn't cost anything to try" simply isn't correct unless your resources (not to mention time) are infinite.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone point me to any randomized, controlled, peer-reviewed studies showing that occupational therapy is effective in treating sensory processing problems or fine motor delays in preschoolers? I work in research but can't seem to find these. Most of the studies I've located do not have research designs that enable observers to distinguish the effects of treatment from changes that would have occurred in children regardless as they matured. Are methodologically rigorous studies out there?

If there aren't, and you decided to go ahead and spend the money on OT, how did you make that decision? It seems like a ton of money to spend without being more sure about efficacy, but maybe worth doing because OT at least isn't harmful, and might help even if it hasn't been studied properly? TIA.

You search PubMed and narrow by population. However, you're over thinking. If your preschooler has fine motor delays then OT is pretty much all you can do.

I guess it depends on what you see as the opportunity cost of pursuing OT. If you have finite resources and you spend $10,000 on OT out of pocket, that's $10,000 you aren't spending on something else that could benefit your child. If OT doesn't have a major effect beyond what would occur anyway as the child matured, then you've wasted $10,000 that you could have spent on something else to help your child. In other words, if the effect of OT is the same as enrolling your child in gymnastics or encouraging her to play with Lego more, then there's a lot of families who could just do those things and then do something else useful with the remaining $9,500-- including other types of enrichment experiences or just plunking it into a 529, where it will easily compound into quite a bit more money that will for sure bring a benefit to the child someday.

The notion that "OT might help, won't hurt, doesn't cost anything to try" simply isn't correct unless your resources (not to mention time) are infinite.