Importance: A contributing factor to the gap between research publication and clinical implementation is the lack of specificity used when reporting findings.

Objective: This scoping review used the Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System (RTSS) to determine which elements of specificity are most often present and omitted from research using Ayres Sensory Integration® (ASI).

Data Sources: The following databases were searched: PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, and ERIC.

Study Selection and Data Collection: Eligible studies used ASI in an outpatient setting with children who had sensory integration or processing difficulties. Studies selected were quantitative (Level 1, 2, 3, or 4), available in full text, peer reviewed, and published in English within the past 20 yr.

Findings: Of the 22 studies that met inclusion criteria, 100% included ingredients (actions of the therapist), 63% included mechanisms of action (reasoning behind these actions), 86% included targets, and 23% described client progression. We also found that 49% of all ingredients were listed in conjunction with a target, 15% were listed in conjunction with a mechanism of action, and 11% were listed in conjunction with both a target and a mechanism of action.

Conclusions and Relevance: Findings indicate that many studies list ingredients but often omit the mechanism of action. This omission makes replication of the intervention increasingly difficult and prevents a deeper understanding of the clinical reasoning process behind the intervention.

Plain-Language Summary: Gaps identified in this scoping review highlight inconsistencies in the reporting of treatment specificity that may affect the replication and translation of Ayres Sensory Integration® (ASI) research into practice.

You do not currently have access to this content.