Friday, May 16, 2008
Champagne Terrace/Bordeaux (Novotel London West)
Background: Studies report high rates of complementary and alternative medical (CAM ) treatments for children with autism. Little is known about child and family characteristics associated with CAM use.
Objectives: The purpose of this study is to compare the frequency and correlates of CAM treatment in individuals whose autism is associated with del 15q with those without a known genetic cause in order to examine factors determining families’ choices of treatment.
Methods: Families were recruited for a web based survey posted in the IDEAS (isodicentric exchange and support) newsletter and website. Caregivers’ responses to questions about their child’s clinical presentation and types of treatment were recorded and encoded into mutually exclusive categories. The prevalence of CAM strategies, patterns of treatment and associated child and family characteristics were compared to results from a previousPennsylvania survey of caregivers of individuals with ASD without known genetic cause.
Results: 102 families responded (52% response rate), and 82 (80%) reported a family member withdel 15q and an ASD. Age ranged 3-26; 57% males; average age of diagnosis of del 15q was 2.8 years. Comorbidities included intellectual disability 74%, seizures 53%, ADHD 29%, allergies 27%, anxiety 24%, GI symptoms 22%, and others. The most commonly used treatment was sensory integration training, followed by music therapy and ABA . At least 50% of families used ³ 1 type of CAM treatment. The most commonly used treatments were anti-infectives, vitamin supplements, GI medications and restrictive diets. Comparison of sample characteristics with the Pennsylvania sample is forthcoming.
Objectives: The purpose of this study is to compare the frequency and correlates of CAM treatment in individuals whose autism is associated with del 15q with those without a known genetic cause in order to examine factors determining families’ choices of treatment.
Methods: Families were recruited for a web based survey posted in the IDEAS (isodicentric exchange and support) newsletter and website. Caregivers’ responses to questions about their child’s clinical presentation and types of treatment were recorded and encoded into mutually exclusive categories. The prevalence of CAM strategies, patterns of treatment and associated child and family characteristics were compared to results from a previous
Results: 102 families responded (52% response rate), and 82 (80%) reported a family member with
Conclusions: Use of CAM in families with children with