An Evaluation of Practitioner Attitudes on Touch Screen Use in Children with an Autism Spectrum Disorder

Background: The prevalence for Autism Spectrum Disorder’s (ASD’s) in Australia has increased by 42.1% from 2012 to 2015 (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2015). This rapid increase in prevalence has also been reported in the United States, UK and Europe (Kuehn, 2012; Baird, Simonoff, Pickles, Chandler, Loucas, Meldrum & Charman, 2006; Hughes, 2011). This escalation in prevalence has subsequently increased the demand for therapeutic services. Touch screen applications (apps) have the potential to alleviate the demand on therapeutic interventions or supplement them because of the way in which they deliver information. For instance, touch screen apps can meet a child with ASD’s need for repetition or minimise the reliance on social communication. Furthermore, apps might provide a cost effective solution for families who require intervention while on a waiting list or as an adjunct to therapy. There is limited information on practitioners’ experiences with touch screens as a tool for learning and therapeutic outcomes. These data would inform future practice of the efficacy of interventions delivered by touch screens for children with ASDs.

Objectives: This research has set out to explore whether practitioners working with children with ASD’s (2-17 years) are using touch screens and ASD specific apps as part of their therapy. An understanding of how touch screens are used (e.g. as an AAC, reward, video modelling) could indicate what practitioners are finding most useful for children’s therapy and might help educate other practitioners and parents on suitable uses of touch screen apps. This research aims to further understand whether children with ASD’s are learning as effectively, or better from touch screens, compared with non-technological methods.

Methods:

Practitioners (n=69) were recruited from the health sector (n=51) and education sector (n=18). The majority of practitioners were psychologists and primary school teachers.

Participants views were accessed using an online survey. The survey was developed for the purpose of this study. Questions were informed by own practice, and parent and practitioner comments on their views of touch screen use as a therapeutic tool. The survey was shared on the University website, and shared amongst practitioners.

Results: Psychologists used ASD apps more often in their sessions (72%) than educators (38.9%). A chi square test indicated the difference between groups was significant p = 012. Quantitative and qualitative analyses informed that practitioners in both groups reported more positive behavioural effects as a consequence of using touch screens (e.g. calming, more engaged and attentive), compared to negative effects (tantrums, challenging behaviour observed). Practitioners in the health sector indicated children’s learning from a touch screen was more effective than non-technological methods (58.3%). Practitioners in both groups described children with ASD as less anxious when learning from touch screens, compared to other methods (health: 61.1%, educational: 80%).

Conclusions: This research demonstrates touch screens are being used by practitioners as a tool for engagement with therapy and children, and adolescents with ASD’s are benefitting from such platforms. These data might encourage other practitioners to use touch screens in their therapy and furthermore help shape future therapeutic practice for this population.