Free
Research Article  |   July 1981
Relationship of the Southern California Sensory Integration Tests, the Southern California Postrotary Nystagmus Test, and Clinical Observations Accompanying Them to Evaluations in Otolaryngology, Ophthalmology, and Audiology: Two Descriptive Case Studies
Charlotte Brasic Royeen; George Lesinski; Sharon Ciani; David Schneider
Author Affiliations
  • Charlotte Brasic Royeen, M.S., OTR, was a Graduate Fellow in Occupational Therapy, Program in Occupational Therapy, Washington University, School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, when this investigation was conducted. She is now an instructor, Howard University, Washington, DC
  • George Lesinski, M.D., is Associate Professor of Otolarynology and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Cincinnati Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio
  • Sharon Ciani, M.A., is Assistant Professor of Clinical Audiology, University of Cincinnati Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio
  • David Schneider, M.D., is an ophthalmologist, Resident, University of Cincinnati Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio
Article Information
Neurologic Conditions / Sensory Integration and Processing / Vision / Features
Research Article   |   July 1981
Relationship of the Southern California Sensory Integration Tests, the Southern California Postrotary Nystagmus Test, and Clinical Observations Accompanying Them to Evaluations in Otolaryngology, Ophthalmology, and Audiology: Two Descriptive Case Studies
American Journal of Occupational Therapy, July 1981, Vol. 35, 443-450. doi:10.5014/ajot.35.7.443
American Journal of Occupational Therapy, July 1981, Vol. 35, 443-450. doi:10.5014/ajot.35.7.443
Abstract

A preliminary investigation was conducted into the relationship of the Southern California Sensory Integration Tests (SCSIT), the Southern California Postrotary Nystagmus Test (SCPNT), and clinical observations accompanying these tests to evaluations in otolaryngology, ophthalmology, and audiology. The subjects were two children with vestibularly based sensory integrative dysfunction. The results revealed that there was no agreement between the results of the SCPNT and the otolaryngological evaluation. There was some agreement between the ophthalmology evaluation and the clinical observations accompanying the SCSIT. Both subjects scored poorly in two areas of auditory processing. Possible reasons for these results are discussed as well as implications for occupational therapy research and practice.