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

Miyahara, Motohide; Hillier, Susan; Pridham, Liz; Nakagawa, Shinichi

doi:10.1002/14651858.cd010914.pub2

Cited by 26 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 73 publications

(79 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The prevalence of interventions designed to take one of two specific theoretical approaches was also notable. These approaches were (a) a "task-orientated" approach focused on improving particular functional motor abilities such as handwriting (Miyahara, Hillier, Pridham, & Nakagawa, 2017); (b) an approach focused on training foundational movement patterns that are proposed as building blocks for more contextually specific motor abilities (Logan et al, 2018). In comparison, far fewer interventions adopted more "processes-orientated" approaches purporting to act on underlying sensorimotor mechanisms (e.g., visuomotor integration) that hope to yield more systemic benefits that generalize to all motor abilities.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review of randomized and case‐controlled trials investigating the effectiveness of school‐based motor skill interventions in 3‐ to 12‐year‐old children

Eddy

Wood

Shire

et al. 2019

Child

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Research suggests that children identified with impaired motor skills can respond well to intensive therapeutic interventions delivered via occupational and physical therapy services. There is, however, a need to explore alternative approaches to delivering interventions outside traditional referral‐based clinic settings because limited resources mean such health services often struggle to meet demand. This review sets out to systematically assess the evidence for and against school‐based interventions targeted at improving the motor skills of children aged between 3 and 12 years old. Method Five electronic databases were searched systematically (AMED, CINAHL, Cochrane, Medline, and PsycINFO) for peer‐reviewed articles published between January 2012 and July 2018. Studies were eligible if they implemented a school‐based motor skill intervention with a randomized or case‐controlled trial design that objectively measured motor skills as an outcome, which were not specific to an athletic or sporting skill. Participants had to be aged between 3 and 12 years old and free from neurological disorders known to affect muscle function. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Results Twenty‐three studies met the inclusion criteria. These studies encompassed interventions targeted at training: fundamental movement skills, handwriting, fine, and global motor skills. The majority of these studies reported beneficial impact on motor function specifically, but some interventions also assessed subsequent impacts on activity and participation (but not well‐being). A number of the studies had methodological shortcomings that means these results need to be interpreted with caution. Conclusions Schools appear to be an effective setting for motor skill interventions, but the extent of benefit likely depends on the type of intervention. Moreover, confirmation is needed as to whether benefits extend beyond motor function into everyday activities, participation, and well‐being. Future research should include follow‐up measures to assess the longer term efficacy of school‐based interventions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review of randomized and case‐controlled trials investigating the effectiveness of school‐based motor skill interventions in 3‐ to 12‐year‐old children

Eddy

Wood

Shire

et al. 2019

Child

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For the reliable and valid assessment of the quality of evidence in reviews, primary intervention studies need to fully address the risk of bias specified by Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) (Guyatt et al 2011). As a solution for the subgrouping issue, 740 M. Miyahara et al reviewers may have to rely on the original intervention studiesˈ descriptions for the labels of intervention (Miyahara et al 2014) or wait for a development of a specific intervention protocol. Finally, more meta-reviews are needed to ensure the methodological quality of reviews.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A narrative meta‐review of a series of systematic and meta‐analytic reviews on the intervention outcome for children with developmental co‐ordination disorder

Miyahara

Lagisz

Nakagawa

et al. 2016

Child

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Quality and risk of bias of included articles were variable, limiting the robustness of the conclusions resulting from this review. Previous systematic reviews considering task-specific training 13 and motor-based interventions 10 for children with DCD have reported similar findings in regards to small numbers of studies of heterogeneous quality and intervention type, and likewise found difficulties establishing definite conclusions. Movement-based interventions with emerging efficacy for older children with motor impairment, such as task-specific training 52 or goal-directed interventions based on motorlearning principles, 12 require further investigation to determine whether they are effective for children of preschool age.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…Movement-based interventions, in which children actively participate in therapy, may facilitate improvements in motor skills and provide opportunity to learn, practise, and consolidate these skills. 2,10 Previous systematic reviews for children with motor impairment have focused on specific diagnoses, such as cerebral palsy (CP) 11,12 or developmental coordination disorder (DCD), 10,13 or focused on specific populations, such as children born preterm, 14 who are at risk of motor impairment. 15 While some interventions are diagnosis specific, others, including movement-based interventions aiming to improve motor skills, may have capacity to improve outcomes for children with a range of diagnoses.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is particularly important for the preschool age group, for which there are limited systematic reviews to date. Previous reviews have focused on early intervention during infancy 14,20 or, if considering older children, have often included participants across a broad age range, 10,11,13,21 which poses a limitation when translating the findings to children of preschool age. One previous systematic review has specifically considered motor skill interventions for preschool-age children, but included only children with developmental delay.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Movement‐based interventions for preschool‐age children with, or at risk of, motor impairment: a systematic review

Cameron

Albesher

McGinley

et al. 2019

Develop Med Child Neuro

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim To explore the efficacy of movement‐based interventions to improve motor skills in preschool‐age children with, or at risk of, motor impairment, including those with a diagnosis of cerebral palsy, autism spectrum disorder, and developmental coordination disorder. Method Relevant electronic databases were searched for randomized or quasi‐randomized controlled trials. Outcomes were classified using domains of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: Children & Youth version. Quality was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Effect sizes were calculated using Cohen’s d. Results Seventeen articles exploring a heterogeneity of intervention types, population groups, and outcome measures met the inclusion criteria. Movement‐based interventions did not significantly improve outcomes in either the body structure and function or activity domains in most studies. No studies used a participation outcome measure. Interpretation There is a paucity of evidence exploring movement‐based interventions in the preschool‐age group. Although movement‐based interventions showed potential for improving body structure and function and activity outcomes for children with motor impairment, results were mostly not significant. Small sample sizes, variable study quality, and risk of bias limit confidence in the results. What this paper adds The evidence is inconclusive to support movement‐based interventions in this group. No studies used outcome measures assessing participation. Variability in intervention type and study quality limit confidence in results.

show abstract

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

Cited by 26 publications

References 73 publications

A systematic review of randomized and case‐controlled trials investigating the effectiveness of school‐based motor skill interventions in 3‐ to 12‐year‐old children

A systematic review of randomized and case‐controlled trials investigating the effectiveness of school‐based motor skill interventions in 3‐ to 12‐year‐old children

A narrative meta‐review of a series of systematic and meta‐analytic reviews on the intervention outcome for children with developmental co‐ordination disorder

Movement‐based interventions for preschool‐age children with, or at risk of, motor impairment: a systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About