Non-Medical Interventions for Individuals with Rett Syndrome: A Systematic Review

Autor/inn/en	Amoako, Annika Nina; Hare, Dougal Julian
Titel	Non-Medical Interventions for Individuals with Rett Syndrome: A Systematic Review
Quelle	In: Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 33 (2020) 5, S.808-827 (20 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	ORCID (Amoako, Annika Nina)
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1360-2322
DOI	10.1111/jar.12694
Schlagwörter	Genetic Disorders; Intervention; Interpersonal Communication; Music; Assistive Technology; Augmentative and Alternative Communication; Attention; Cognitive Development; Program Effectiveness; Quality of Life; Brain Hemisphere Functions; Physical Fitness; Behavior Problems; Research Methodology + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Interpersonale Kommunikation; Musik; Aufmerksamkeit; Kognitive Entwicklung; Lebensqualität; Leistungsfähigkeit; Research method; Forschungsmethode
Abstract	Background: Research into Rett syndrome has included various medical interventions. Non-medical interventions are relatively under-researched. Recent technological communication intervention advances have contributed to the evidence base in Rett syndrome. Method: The Embase, PsycINFO and MEDLINE were systematically searched for peer-reviewed papers describing non-medical interventions for Rett syndrome. All identified papers were evaluated for methodological quality. Results: Thirteen studies of adequate methodological quality were reviewed (across N = 60 participants). Interventions were primarily communication interventions including music, assistive technology, augmentative and alternative communication strategies, attentional training and cognitive rehabilitation training. All studies reported positive outcomes across communication, quality of life, brain stem activity, physical fitness and a reduction in stereotyped behaviour. However, methodological challenges to generalizability, standardization, lack of follow-up and/or small-N samples were common. Conclusions: The review highlights the paucity of high-quality research. Future research is needed to build on current research and improve validity and generalizability of interventions. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01