Facebook Twitter YouTube

18852

Sensory Processing Differences and Urinary Incontinence in School Aged Children

Saturday, October 20, 2012
Grand Ballroom A/B (Hilton Riverside)
Emily T. Cupelli, DNP, CPNP1, Lori Escallier, PhD, RN1, Shaolan Xiang, BA1, Nora Galambos, PhD1 and Israel Franco, FACS, FAAP2, (1)Pediatric Urology, Stony Brook University & Maimonides Medical Center, Brooklyn, NY, (2)Pediatric Urology, New York Medical College, Valhalla, NY

Sensory Processing Differences and Urinary Incontinence In School Aged Children

 

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to determine if there is a relationship between sensory processing differences and urinary incontinence in typically developing school aged children. Incontinent children appear more sensitive to touch, less sensitive to wet clothing, startle easily, and often appear withdrawn. These behaviors may result from a dysfunction in any component of sensory processing: registration, integration, motor planning or response. Several studies have shown an abnormality in the acoustic startle of incontinent children, a component of motor planning. A study of sensory processing will produce a comprehensive profile of this population.

Methods  

The Short Sensory Profile (SSP) was administered to parents of  214 children, age 5-11, with day, night, or combined incontinence in a large, multi-ethnic urban area. Exclusion: developmental delay, ADD/HD, Sensory Processing Dysfunction, vesicoureteral reflux or acute illness. Total sensory scores and subscores  (individual tactile, taste/smell, movement, sensory seeking, auditory filtering, high/low energy, or visual/auditory sensitvity) were obtained. Descriptive statistics, T test analysis, and regression analysis were performed.

Results

209 valid responses (100 male,109 female),  mean 7.8  yrs. T test : total sensory scores were significantly lower for incontinence (p=.007). Tactile sensitivity scores were lower for urgency  (p=.039). Auditory sensitivity scores were lower for dysfunctional voiding (p=.041), and sensory seeking (p=.006).

Short Sensory Scale Score Classification by percent for sample

Frequency

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid

Typical Performance

117

56.0

56.0

56.0

Probable Difference

49

23.4

23.4

79.4

Definite Difference

43

20.6

20.6

100.0

Total

209

100.0

100.0

T Test Summary

Incontinence (all types)

Urge Incontinence

Dysfunctional voiding

Total Sensory score

152.59(p=0.007)

153.25(p=0.039)

153.56(p=0.015)

Sensory Seeking

not sig.

25.03(p=0.003)

25.37(p=0.006)

Auditory Sensitivity

not sig.

not sig.

21.23(p=0.041)

 

 Regression Analysis

B

S.E.

Wald

df

Sig.

Exp(B)

 95% C. I. Low

Upper

Age

-0.37

0.098

14.386

1

<0.0005

0.69

0.57

0.836

SSTtactile5(water)

1.712

0.628

7.438

1

0.006

5.542

1.619

18.969

SSTtactile 6 (standing in line)

1.603

0.56

8.203

1

0.004

4.968

1.659

14.879

Constant

4.812

0.949

25.693

1

<0.0005

122.985

Conclusion

A significant number of incontinent children showed probable or definite differences in sensory processing. Children with urge incontinence and dysfunctional voiding had higher sensory seeking scores, manifesting as avoidance behavior or hyper-reactive responsivity. A strong association is shown between incontinence,  younger age, and tactile sensation. SSP survey can be used to rapidly assess clinically significant behaviors.