The Comparison efficiency of Pivotal Response treatment (PRT) and Sensory Integration (SI) to reduce unusual quality of social interactions, unusual quality of communication and self-stimulatory behaviors in Autistic children

This study was conducted to compare the effect of Pivotal Response treatment and sensory integration treatment in reducing the symptoms of male autistic children, including abnormal quality of social interactions, abnormal quality of communication and self-stimulatory behaviors. The clinical trial study was done on 36 boys with autism between 8-12 years’ old in pediatric rehabilitation clinic in Tehran, Iran. Patients randomly divided into three groups: control and pivotal response treatment (PRT) and sensory integration (SI). The interventional groups were received 20 sessions of PRT and SI during the two months, but the control group did not receive any intervention. All patients were examined in the field of social communicative, interactive disorder and self-stimulatory behavior, using autism diagnostic interview revised. Data were analyzed by using SPSS-16 and MANCOVA test. The results showed that there is a difference between the means of the control group and the means of the experimental groups in the components of abnormal quality of social interactions, abnormal quality of communication and self-stimulatory behaviors are different. Also, there was a significant difference between the PRT and SI groups affected by the treatment program and the control group who received treatment, and according to (F (6, 26) =17/98, P = 0.000, Eta = 0.597). Regarding to moderate averages, this difference has advantages for trained groups. The results of this study showed that both methods were more effective than non-treatment. There was a significant difference between the mean of Pivotal Response training group and sensory integration treatment regarding to the abnormal quality of social interactions and abnormal quality of communication which was in the benefit of Pivotal Response group. And regarding to the effectiveness of self-stimulatory behaviors, no significant difference found out and both treatments were effective compared to the control group.