대한감각통합치료학회지 (The Journal of Korean Academy of Sensory Integration)

  • 제19권1호
  • /
  • Pages.24-38
  • /
  • 2021
  • /
  • 1738-0405(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2384-115X(eISSN)
대한감각통합치료학회 (Korean Academy of Sensory Integration)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Evaluation in Ayres Sensory Integration® (EASI)의 번역 및 구성타당도 연구

A Translation and Construct Validity Study of the Evaluation in Ayres Sensory Integration® (EASI)

  • 김경미 (인제대학교 보건의료융합대학 작업치료학과) ;
  • 이지현 (유원대학교 작업치료학과) ;
  • 정혜림 (가야대학교 작업치료학과) ;
  • 최정실 (충북보건과학대학교 작업치료과) ;
  • 홍은경 (신성대학교 작업치료과)
  • Kim, Kyeong-Mi (Dept. of Occupational Therapy, College of Health and Medical Affairs, Inje University) ;
  • Lee, Ji-Hyun (Dept. of Occupational Therapy, U1 University) ;
  • Jung, Hyerim (Dept. of Occupational Therapy, Kaya University) ;
  • Choi, Jeong-Sil (Dept. of Occupational Therapy, Chungbuk Health & Science University) ;
  • Hong, Eunkyoung (Dept of Occupational Therapy, Shinsung University)
  • 투고 : 2021.04.30
  • 심사 : 2021.06.14
  • 발행 : 2021.06.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

목적 : Evaluation in Ayres Sensory Integration(EASI)의 국내사용을 위해 번역연구를 통한 한글 연구판 EASI를 제시하고, EASI의 구성타당도를 검정하고자 하였다. 연구방법 : EASI의 번역연구는 타문화 적응을 위한 번역 가이드라인의 4단계에 따라 실행하였다. 과정은 번역, 번역내용의 통합과 내용타당도 분석을 거쳤으며, 하위 검사 하나는 역번역을 실시하여 한글 연구판 EASI를 제시하였다. 구성타당도 검증은 3~12세의 일반아동과 감각통합문제를 가진 아동을 대상으로 EASI를 사용하여 평가하였다. 구성타당도는 일반아동과 감각통합문제를 가진 아동 그룹의 집단비교와 학령전기와 학령기 일반아동의 집단비교를 통하여 검증하였다. 집단비교는 Mann Whitney U 검정을 사용하여 분석하였다. 결과 : 번역 내용타당도 검증 결과 20개의 모든 항목은 평균 3.17점 이상을 보였다. 일반아동군과 감각통합문제 아동군의 EASI 영역별 차이를 알아본 결과 4개의 영역 중 감각지각 영역에서 두 그룹간 차이를 보였다(p=0.044). 세부적으로 촉각과 전정감각과 관련된 항목에서 통계학적인 차이를 보였다. 일반아동의 학령전기 아동군와 학령기 아동군의 EASI 영역별 비교에서는 실행, 안구, 자세 및 양측운동통합의 2개 영역에서 통계학적 차이가 있는 것으로 나타났다. 결론 : EASI 번역연구를 통해 제시된 한글판 EASI는 연구용으로 사용하기에 적합하다. 구성타당도 검증결과 일반아동과 진단군 아동의 차이를 설명할 수 있는 항목들과 연령에 따른 차이를 설명할 수 있는 항목들을 제시하였다. 이는 EASI 결과 해석에 고려될 수 있으리라 생각된다. 감각통합 기능의 종합적인 평가와 중재에 대한 근거를 제시하기 위해서는 앞으로 검사자간 신뢰도와 검사-재검사 신뢰도 검증이 필요하며, 추가적인 타당도 검증이 필요하리라 생각된다.

Objective : This study aimed to create a Korea translation of the Evaluation in Ayres Sensory Integration (EASI) and to then test the adapted version for construct validity. Methods : The translation and content validation process were conducted in accordance with a four-step process, namely translation, integration, content validity examination, and backward translation. The construct validity of the translated version was evaluated using the EASI for children aged 3~12 years with and without sensory integration problems, comparing the two groups as well as preschool and school-aged groups. The group comparison was analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test in SPSS. Results : In terms of content validity, all 20 items averaged more than 3.17 points. Of the four EASI categories, there was a difference in Sensory Perception (p=0.044) between the typical and sensory integration groups, and there was a statistical difference between tactile and vestibular sensations. Between the preschool and school-aged children, statistical difference was observed in two categories, namely Praxis and Ocular-Postural-Bilateral Motor Integration. Conclusion : Based on its construct validity, the Korean version of EASI is suitable for use in research. The construct validity study highlighted items that explain differences between typical and diagnostic children and items that explain those differences by age. Our findings could therefore be considered when interpreting EASI results.

키워드

과제정보

이 연구는 2019년도 대한감각통합치료학회 연구 지원에 의해 이루어졌음.

참고문헌

  1. Asha, V., Asher, L., Parham, L. D., & Knox, S. (2008). Interrater reliability of Sensory Integration and Praxis Tests(SIPT) score interpretation. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 62, 308-319. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.62.3.308
  2. Ayres, A. J. (1972). Sensory integration and learning disorders. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.
  3. Ayres, A. J. (1979). Sensory integration and child. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.
  4. Ayres, A. J. (1986). Sensory integration dysfunction: Test score constellations, Part II of a final project report. Torrence, CA: Sensory Integration International.
  5. Ayres, A. J. (1989). Sensory integration and praxis tests manual. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.
  6. Ayres, A. J. (2000). Sensory integration and praxis test (6th ed). Los Angeles, CA: Western Psychological Services.
  7. Bundy, A. C., Lane, S. J., & Murray, E. A. (2002). Sensory integration: Theory and practice. Philadelphia, PA: F.A. Davis Company.
  8. Dunn, W. (1999). Sensory profile user's manual. San Antonio: Psychological Corporation.
  9. Dunn, W., & Brown, C. (1997). Factor analysis on the sensory profile from a national sample of children without disabilities. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 51(7), 490-495. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.51.7.490
  10. Exner, C. E. (2001). Development of hand skills. In J. Case-Smith (Ed.), Occupational therapy for children (4th ed., pp. 289-328). St. Louis: Mosby.
  11. Holmlumd, M., & Orban, K. (2020). Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the performance-based test-Evaluation in Ayres Sensory Integration®. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, Published Online: 14 October 2020. https://doi.org/10.1080/11038128.2020.1831059
  12. Hong, E. K. (2020). A systematic review of sensory integration intervention for children in Korea. Journal of Korean Academy of Sensory Integration, 18(2), 55-68. https://dx.doi.org/10.18064/JKASI.2020.18.2.55
  13. Huh, J., Williams, H. G,, & Burke, J. R. (1998). Development of bilateral motor control in children with developmental coordination disorders. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 40 (7), 474-484. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.1998.tb15398.x
  14. Hunt, J., Van Hooydonk, E., Faller, P., Mailloux, Z., & Schaaf, R. C. (2017). Manualization of occupational therapy using Ayres Sensory Integration® for Autism. Occupation, Participation and Health, 37(3), 141-148. https://doi.org/10.1177/1539449217697044
  15. Jaarsveld, A., Mailloux, Z., & Herzberg, D. S. (2012). The use of the sensory integration and Praxis tests with South African children. South African Journal of Science, 42(3), 12-18.
  16. Law, M. (2002). Participation in the occupations of everyday life. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 56, 640-649. http://dx.doi.org/10.5014/ajot.56.6.640
  17. Lee, C. H. (2020). Research methodology for physical therapists and occupational therapists (6th ed). Seoul: Gyechuk.
  18. Lee, J. H., Kim, K. M., Chang, M. Y., & Hong, E. K. (2019). Study of validity and interrater reliability of Korean version of the Peabody developmental motor scale 2. Journal of Korean Academy of Sensory Integration, 17(3), 14-25. https://dx.doi.org/10.18064/JKASI.2019.12.3.014
  19. Lim, Y. J., Park, K. Y., & Yoo, E. Y. (2007). Pilot study to establish content validity of a Korean-translated version of a sensory profile. Journal of Korean Society of Occupational Therapy, 15(2), 25-42.
  20. Lin, C. K., Wu, H. M., Wang, H. Y., Tseng, M. H., & Lin, C. H. (2013). Age as a factor in sensory integration function in Taiwanese children. Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, 9, 995-1001. https://doi.org/10.2147/NDT.S49514
  21. Mailloux, Z., Parham, L. D., & Roley, S. S. (2019). Evaluation in Ayres sensory integration: International data collection manual. Unpublished Manuscript.
  22. Mailloux, Z., Parham, L. D., Roley, S. S., Ruzzano, L., & Schaaf, R. C. (2018). Introduction to the Evaluation in Ayres Sensory Integration®(EASI). American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 72, 1-7. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2018.028241
  23. Miller, L. (2006). Sensational kids: Hope and help for children with sensory processing disorder. New York: The Penguin Group.
  24. Neuman, A. (2003). Assessing sensory processing abilities in Israeli children aged 3-10: A study of cross-cultural adaptation of the Sensory Profile caregiver questionnaire. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
  25. Oh, S. H., & Kim, B. J. (2002). New concept of validity for psychological assessment instruments and its usage. Korean Journal of Sport Psychology, 13(3), 111-126.
  26. Parham, L. D., Smith Roley, S., May-Benson, T., Koomar, J., Brett-Green, B., Burke, J. P., et al. (2011). Development of a fidelity measure for research on effectiveness of Ayres sensory Integration®. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 65, 133-142. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2011.000745
  27. Schaaf, R. C., & Mailloux, Z. (2015). Clinician's guide for implementing Ayres sensory integration®: Promoting participation for children with Autism. Bethesda, MD: American Occupational Therapy Association Press.
  28. Sousa, V. D., & Rojjanasrirat, W. (2011). Translation, adaptation and validation of instruments or scales for use in cross-cultural health care research: A clear and user-friendly guideline. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 17(2), 268-274. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01434.x
  29. Yoo, E. Y., Jung, M. Y., Park, S. Y., & Choi, E. H. (2006). Current trends of occupational therapy assessment tool by Korean occupational therapist. Journal of Korean Society of Occupational Therapy, 14(3), 27-37.