Comparative analysis of gross motor coordination between overweight/obese and eutrophic children

Abstract

Introduction: Overweight and obese children may have lower motor coordination score than normal-weight children. Objective: To compare gross motor coordination between overweight/obese and normal-weight children and investigate the associated factors with the motor coordination scores. Method: This cross-sectional study involved 169 children of both genders, aged 6-9 years. Children with malformations, bone, muscle, and joint or neurological disorders, and BMI z < -2 were excluded. Gross motor coordination was assessed by the “Körperkoordinationstest für Kinder” (KTK). The associated factors with the motor coordination scores were analyzed by linear regression. Results: The mean scores for balancing backwards (84.2 ± 13.2 vs. 91.0 ± 15.0), hopping over on one foot (127.9 ± 10.1 vs. 132.3 ± 12.1), shifting platforms sidewise (123.5 ± 23.4 vs. 129.8 ± 14.9), as well as the overall motor scores (112.5 ± 14.8 vs. 118.8 ± 11.6) were significantly lower (p < 0.05) in overweight/obese children when compared to normal-weight children. The percentage of poor motor scores (< 85) in balancing backwards was higher in overweight/obese children (60.4% vs. 36.4%, p = 0.004) and was similar for jumping sideways (18.8% vs. 9.9%, p = 0.116), as well as for shifting platforms sidewise (6.3% vs. 0.8%, p = 0.070). By multiple linear regression analysis, the variables overweight/obesity and sports practice for less than 2 times/week decreased significantly (p < 0.05) the motor coordination score by -18.7 and -15.6 points, respectively. Conclusion: The overweight/obese children scored lower in the motor coordination tests compared to the normal-weight children. Overweight/obesity and low frequency of physical activity were associated with lower scores of gross motor coordination.

Effect of biological maturation on gross motor coordination in boys: a mediation analysis

“…In the last 10 years, among the studies published with the KTK, the works that aimed to analyze the association between performance in their tasks and the BMI of children and young people stood out, due to their pioneering spirit and greater number of publications, either in cross-sectional [11,24,25], longitudinal [26], as well as, in systematic review with meta-analysis [27]. The evidence showed that overweight and obese individuals had worse KTK performances compared to their normal weight peers.…”

Construct Validity Evidence in the Motor Coordination Test with Ball - MCTB

“…In Brazil, no official estimate of poor motor coordination exists, possibly because of the country’s continental dimension, a low prevalence of PE classes in schools, and a low number of accessible (free) tools to promote the development and assessment of motor coordination in Brazilian children and adolescents, complicating measurements within the context of PE (Silva & Beltrame, 2013). However, in the last decade, studies, including those of Brazilians, have shown that students’ motor coordination is poor in relationship to age or level of motor development (Andrade et al, 2020; Luz et al, 2015; Moreira et al, 2014; Nobre et al, 2014; Santos et al, 2013, 2015, 2016; Santos & Ferracioli, 2020; Santos & Vieira, 2013; Silva & Beltrame, 2013; Valentini et al, 2014).…”

“…Although there is no gold standard instrument to assess motor coordination performance, several validated tests have been proposed for different populations and in different fields of sports science: Test of Gross Motor Development 2 – TGMD-3 (Ulrich, 2016); Motor Scale Development - MSD (Rosa Neto et al, 2010); the Bruininks-Osertsky Test of Motor Proficiency Second Edition - BOT-2 (Andrade et al, 2020; Bruininks & Bruininks, 2005); the Körperkoordinationstest für Kinder - KTK (Kiphard & Schilling, 1974; Moreira et al, 2019); the Movement Assessment Battery for Children MABC-2 (Henderson et al, 2007; Valentini et al, 2014); the Assessment of Basic Motor Competencies - Motorische Basiskompetenzen - MOBAK (Herrmann et al, 2015); the Wiener Koordinationsparcours - WKP (Warwitz, 1982); and the Evaluation of the Motor Coordination with Ball - TECOBOL (Silva, 2010), among others. The use of these tools is beneficial, because they provide standardized assessment procedures, comparative norms, and valid and reliable information for diagnosing possible motor deficits and designing intervention programs in different areas.…”

“…However, despite good results obtained in Brazilian samples, in terms of fit of psychometric procedures, it is important to emphasize that previous authors often used original reference values and did not examine or adjust their dimensions or cutoffs for possible cultural diversity influences on motor disparities. Some prior studies alert test users to the need for cross cultural comparisons of motor tests and for separate test validity research for each context to determine any needs for modifications to the test’s original scores and cutoffs (Andrade et al, 2020; Hua et al, 2013; Patel & Gabbard, 2017; Vandorpe et al, 2011; Yun & Ulrich, 2002). Pasquali (2010) emphasized that assessment is a dynamic and complex process that requires clear and pre-determined goals.…”