Perceptions of three terms to describe physical awkwardness in children

Using the Semantic Differential Technique to Assess Stereotypes toward Individuals with Disabilities: The Relevance of Warmth and Competence

This study analyzes social perceptions towards groups with different types of disability, as well as the relationship between the judgments towards these groups, oneself and other significant individuals. The assessment was carried out using a Semantic Differential scale completed by181 participants. Results supported the Stereotype Content Model, as the different groups with disabilities were perceived in a more uniform way than those who did not share this label, and people with intellectual disability elicited paternalistic feelings. The results also support a two-factor model to explore the content of the stereotypes. Understanding the factors that contribute to the formation of social judgments is key to the implementation of actions that modify stereotypes and prejudices and promote equity.

Task-oriented interventions for children with developmental co-ordination disorder

BACKGROUND

Developmental co-ordination disorder (DCD) is a common childhood disorder, which can persist into adolescence and adulthood. Children with DCD have difficulties in performing the essential motor tasks required for self-care, academic, social and recreational activities.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of task-oriented interventions on movement performance, psychosocial functions, activity, and participation for children with DCD and to examine differential intervention effects as a factor of age, sex, severity of DCD, intervention intensity, and type of intervention.

SEARCH METHODS

In March 2017, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, 13 other databases, and five trials registers. We also searched reference lists, and contacted members of the mailing list of the International Conference on DCD to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that compared the task-oriented intervention with either an inactive control intervention or an active control intervention in children and adolescents aged four to 18 years with a diagnosis of DCD.Types of outcome measures included changes in motor function, as assessed by standardised performance outcome tests and questionnaires; adverse events; and measures of participation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

All review authors participated in study selection, data extraction, and assessments of risk of bias and quality, and two review authors independently performed all tasks. Specifically, two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts to eliminate irrelevant studies, extracted data from the included studies, assessed risk of bias, and rated the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach. In cases of ambiguity or information missing from the paper, one review author contacted trial authors.

MAIN RESULTS

This review included 15 studies (eight RCTs and seven quasi-RCTs). Study characteristicsThe trials included 649 participants of both sexes, ranging in age from five to 12 years.The participants were from Australia, Canada, China, Sweden, Taiwan, and the UK.Trials were conducted in hospital settings; at a university-based clinic, laboratory, or centre; in community centres; at home or school, or both at home and school.The durations of task-oriented interventions were mostly short term (less than six months), with the total number of sessions ranging from five to 50. The length of each session ranged from 30 to 90 minutes, and the frequencies ranged from once to seven times per week.We judged the risk of bias as moderate to high across the studies. Some elements were impossible to achieve (such as blinding of administering personnel or participants).

KEY RESULTS

primary outcomesA meta-analysis of two RCTs and four quasi-RCTs found in favour of task-oriented interventions for improved motor performance compared to no intervention (mean difference (MD) -3.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) -5.88 to -1.39; P = 0.002; I² = 43%; 6 trials, 169 children; very low-quality evidence).A meta-analysis of two RCTs found no effect of task-oriented interventions for improved motor performance compared to no intervention (MD -2.34, 95% CI -7.50 to 2.83; P = 0.38; I² = 42%; 2 trials, 51 children; low-quality evidence).Two studies reported no adverse effects or events. Through personal correspondence, the authors of nine studies indicated that no injuries had occurred.

KEY RESULTS

secondary outcomesDue to the limited number of studies with complete and consistent data, we were unable to perform any meta-analyses on our secondary measures or any subgroup analysis on age, sex, severity of DCD, and intervention intensity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We have very little confidence in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect. The conclusions drawn from previous reviews, which unanimously reported beneficial effects of intervention, are inconsistent with our conclusions. This review highlights the need for carefully designed and executed RCTs to investigate the effect of interventions for children with DCD.

Strength training for a child with suspected developmental coordination disorder

BACKGROUND

Children with developmental coordination disorder (DCD) demonstrate difficulty with feedforward motor control and use varied compensatory strategies.

PURPOSE

To examine gross motor function changes following strength training in a child with motor control difficulties.

CASE DESCRIPTION

A girl aged 6 years 11 months, with apraxia and hypotonia, and demonstrating motor delays consistent with DCD.

INTERVENTION

Twenty-four strength training sessions were completed using a universal exercise unit.

OUTCOMES

Postintervention scores significantly improved on the Bruininks-Oseretsky test of motor proficiency, second edition, and the Canadian occupational performance measure scores and raised the developmental coordination disorder questionnaire, revised 2007, scores above the range where DCD is suspected. Nonsignificant changes in strength were observed.

DISCUSSION

Improved function and significant gains in manual coordination were observed following blocked practice of isolated, simple joint movements during strength training. Improved motor skills may be because of effective use of feedforward control and improved stabilization. Strength training does not rehearse skills using momentum, explaining nonsignificant changes in locomotor or locomotion areas.

Developmental coordination disorder: a review and update

Present in approximately 5-6% of school-aged children, developmental coordination disorder (DCD) is a neuromotor disability in which a child's motor coordination difficulties significantly interfere with activities of daily living or academic achievement. These children typically have difficulty with fine and/or gross motor skills, with motor performance that is usually slower, less accurate, and more variable than that of their peers. In this paper, we review the history of various definitions leading up to the current definition of DCD, prevalence estimates for the disorder, etiology, common co-morbidities, the impact of DCD on the child's life, and prognosis. As well, we briefly describe current interventions for children with the disorder and results of recent neuroimaging studies of the brains of children with DCD, including research by the authors of this paper.

A pilot study of family-focused tele-intervention for children with developmental coordination disorder: development and lessons learned

Developmental coordination disorder (DCD) is characterized by substantial delay in motor development, despite intact neuromuscular, intellectual, and social functions. Although it is estimated there is one child with DCD in every elementary school classroom, sufficient remedial treatment has not yet been provided in medical or educational systems. This article reports on the development of a family-focused tele-intervention program for children with DCD. Unlike conventional direct service delivery, the tele-intervention program offers parents a workbook, DVDs, telephone support, and a blog to teach children at home. This pilot work involved the development of prototype materials (Phase 1), trialing and process evaluation with 3 children and their families (Phase 2), refinement of the program, and a further trial with two other groups of 4 children and their families (Phases 3-4). The outcome of the pilot intervention was satisfactory, but more work is needed to resolve some outstanding issues regarding assessment, diagnosis, telephone consultation, Internet support systems, and discrepant intervention outcomes before tele-intervention is offered to a wider community.

Does an Instruction of a Verbal Labeling Strategy for Hand Movements Improve General Motor Coordination as Well as the Gestural Performance?

This multiple-case study investigated whether an instruction of a verbal labeling strategy could enhance developmental coordination disorder (DCD) as well as developmental dyspraxia (DD) on the basis of relative changes in the Movement Assessment Battery for Children (MABC) Performance Test scores and the Kaufmann Hand Movement Test (KHMT) scores. The authors used a case formulation approach and taught 4 children with DCD during an 8-week intervention period. During the last half of the intervention, the authors additionally instructed the verbal labeling strategy for hand movements. Visual inspection of plotted time-series data from the MABC and the KHMT showed discordant trend lines in 3 children and concordant lines in 1 child. The results indicated that the verbal labeling strategy could be useful for temporary improvement of DD but not for DCD and that DCD and DD might not be directly related.

Parents' representations of their children: an exploratory study using the Osgood Semantic Differential Scales

The results of an exploratory national study carried out in Italy using Osgood's Semantic Differential Scales (Osgood, Suci, & Tannenbaum, 1957) with parents of 100 normal 6- to 11-yr.-old children in mainstream classrooms are reported. The aim was to devise a simple tool to be used to explore parents' perceptions of their children in this age group. Parents were asked to rate "my child" using some of Osgood's Semantic Differential Scales especially adapted for this study. Participants were 97 fathers and 100 mothers. Fathers were 32 to 57 years of age (M = 43.2, SD = 5.4), mothers were 29 to 49 years of age (M = 39.7, SD =4.4). In factor analysis four factors were identified: Activity, Evaluation, Emotions evoked by the child, Personality/Physical contact. Average factor scores were significantly different. There were no significant differences between fathers and mothers on the four factor scores. Children were more positively evaluated the younger they were.

Clumsiness, dyspraxia and developmental co-ordination disorder: how do health and educational professionals in the UK define the terms?

At the turn of the century, the idea that there might be a discrete childhood syndrome, which had 'clumsiness' of movement as its defining symptom, began to emerge. Since then numerous labels have been applied to the syndrome. In spite of recent attempts to standardise the terminology used, variation continues to compromise inter-professional communication and interpretation of research. The aim of this study was to determine how the three terms 'Clumsy', 'Dyspraxia' and 'Developmental Co-ordination Disorder (DCD)' are viewed by health and educational professionals in the UK. Two hundred and thirty-four adults (57% from the health professions and 43% from education) provided a written definition of each term. Content analysis of the 702 definitions was used to determine: (1) the extent to which the terms were familiar/acceptable to the respondents; and (2) to capture differences in the meaning of the term being defined. The results indicated that the terms 'DCD' and 'Dyspraxia' were less familiar than the term 'clumsy' which was, however, least acceptable. Amongst those professionals who were familiar with all three terms, there was general agreement that all were used to describe some sort of overall movement difficulty. Beyond that point, divergence of understanding and inter-professional differences in emphasis emerged. The implications of these differences for clinical and educational practice, research and policy making are discussed.