Can informal assessments be used in

FASD diagnosis?

Graphomotor examples from the

Lililwan Project

Dr Robyn Doney

Occupational Therapist

The Lililwan Project

Background Aims Methods Findings Significance

4

The Lililwan Project

Stage 2•Multidisciplinary assessment ➢ Paediatrician➢ Speech pathologist➢ Psychologist➢Occupational therapist➢ Physiotherapist➢Audiologist➢Opthalmologist

May - October 2011n = 108

➔

Background Aims Methods Findings Significance

Neurodevelopmental Impairment

1. Soft neurological signs

a) Fine motor skills

b) Gross motor skills

c) Visual-motor integration

d) Visual perception

e) Sensory function

f) Articulation

g) Phonology

h) Motor speech

Background Aims Methods Findings Significance

Methods

Informal assessments

• Handwriting

• Drawing

Formal assessments

• Fine motor skills

• Visual-motor integration

• Sensory processing

Background Aims Methods Findings Significance

Assessment Tool: BOT2

Fine Motor Composite

Fine Motor Precision

Fine Motor Integration

Manual Dexterity

Upper-Limb Coordination

Fine Manual Control

Manual Coordination

Background Aims Methods Findings Significance

Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency:

Fine Motor Skills

30

40

50

60

Fine Motor

Composite

Fine Manual Control Manual Coordination

No PAE PAE, no FASD FASD

FASD < No

PAE

p < .05

Stan

dar

d s

core

FASD < No

PAE

p < .05 Robyn Doney

Assessment Tool: Beery VMI

Background Aims Methods Findings Significance

Beery-Buktenica Developmental Test of

Visual-Motor Integration

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

Visual-Motor

Integration

Visual Perception Motor Coordination

No PAE PAE, no FASD FASD

FASD < No

PAE

p < .05

Robyn Doney

Assessment Tool: Sensory Profile

Background Aims Methods Findings Significance

Informal Assessments

Name Sentence Drawing of self

Background Aims Methods Findings Significance

Informal Assessments: Observations

Pencil grasp

Vision

Core strength

Tremor

Sensory issues

Sitting posture

Concentration

Handedness

Following instructions

Writing pressure

BUILDING RAPPORTBackground Aims Methods Findings Significance

Informal Assessments: Analysis

Evaluation Tool of Children’s Handwriting

(ETCH)

Miller Function and Participation Scales

(M-Fun)

Background Aims Methods Findings Significance

Handwriting Results

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

Name: Letter

legibility

Sentence: Letter

legibility

Sentence: Word

legibility

No PAE PAE, no FASD FASD

Background Aims Methods Findings Significance

Drawing Results

4

6

8

10

12

14

Body awareness Motor accuracy Total score

No PAE PAE, no FASD FASD

Background Aims Methods Findings Significance

Sentences

No prenatal alcohol exposure (No-PAE) Prenatal Alcohol Exposure (PAE)

Background Aims Methods Findings Significance

Sentences

No PAE PAE

Background Aims Methods Findings Significance

Sentences

No PAE PAE

DrawingsNo PAE PAE

Background Aims Methods Findings Significance

DrawingsNo PAE PAE

Background Aims Methods Findings Significance

DrawingsNo PAE PAE

Background Aims Methods Findings Significance

DrawingsNo PAE PAE

Background Aims Methods Findings Significance

DrawingsNo PAE PAE

Background Aims Methods Findings Significance

Background Aims Methods Findings Significance

Conclusions

CLINICAL REASONINGBackground Aims Methods Findings Significance

Thankyou ☺