2012
DOI: 10.1177/1087054712468485
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Impact of a Motor-Cognitive Remediation Program on Attentional Functions of Preschoolers With ADHD Symptoms

Abstract: These results are a first step to support the postulate that training specific attentional functions by sensorimotor activities and visual-motor imagery has an impact on the cognitive network of attention. This study suggests the potential value of MCRP addressed to preschoolers with ADHD symptoms.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

1
11
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
1
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…On the other hand, marked cognitive impairments that are observed in the majority of individuals with ADHD in this study supports earlier seminal work which argued that a neuropsychological assessment using cognitive performance tests may contribute to the comprehensive understanding of an individual, including the characterization of individual cognitive strengths and weaknesses and potentially also guide treatment planning, such as the administration of cognitive remediation programs or acquiring compensation strategies to overcome consequences of cognitive deficits (Lange et al 2014;Mapou 2019;Pineda et al 2007). Regarding cognitive remediation, there is yet an ongoing discussion on its usefulness in the treatment of adults with ADHD with nonconforming findings reported in different studies (Chevalier et al 2017;Cortese et al 2015; Working memory 0.138 (p = 0.232) 0.161 (p = 0.180) − 0.041 (p = 0.780) Inhibition/interference control 0.355** (p = 0.002) 0.264* (p = 0.027) − 0.020 (p = 0.893) Cognitive flexibility 0.018 (p = 0.873) 0.005 (p = 0.964) − 0.206 (p = 0.152) Fluency 0.292* (p = 0.010) 0.322** (p = 0.006) 0.449** (p = 0.001) Planning 0.156 (p = 0.222) 0.209 (p = 0.089) 0.143 (p = 0.325) Total compound 0.282* (p = 0.012) 0.344** (p = 0.003) 0.146 (p = 0.311)…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 83%
“…On the other hand, marked cognitive impairments that are observed in the majority of individuals with ADHD in this study supports earlier seminal work which argued that a neuropsychological assessment using cognitive performance tests may contribute to the comprehensive understanding of an individual, including the characterization of individual cognitive strengths and weaknesses and potentially also guide treatment planning, such as the administration of cognitive remediation programs or acquiring compensation strategies to overcome consequences of cognitive deficits (Lange et al 2014;Mapou 2019;Pineda et al 2007). Regarding cognitive remediation, there is yet an ongoing discussion on its usefulness in the treatment of adults with ADHD with nonconforming findings reported in different studies (Chevalier et al 2017;Cortese et al 2015; Working memory 0.138 (p = 0.232) 0.161 (p = 0.180) − 0.041 (p = 0.780) Inhibition/interference control 0.355** (p = 0.002) 0.264* (p = 0.027) − 0.020 (p = 0.893) Cognitive flexibility 0.018 (p = 0.873) 0.005 (p = 0.964) − 0.206 (p = 0.152) Fluency 0.292* (p = 0.010) 0.322** (p = 0.006) 0.449** (p = 0.001) Planning 0.156 (p = 0.222) 0.209 (p = 0.089) 0.143 (p = 0.325) Total compound 0.282* (p = 0.012) 0.344** (p = 0.003) 0.146 (p = 0.311)…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 83%
“…In order to compare the intervention effects, children were divided into four groups based on the assumed severity of the learning difficulty. Thereafter, the following groups were formed: children at-risk for learning difficulties due to family background ( n studies = 8; e.g., low SES) [ 30 ], children with learning difficulties ( n studies = 7; e.g., high risk of ADHD) [ 31 ], learning disabilities ( n studies = 5; e.g., autism spectrum disorder) [ 32 ], physical disabilities ( n studies = 2; e.g., cerebral palsy) [ 33 ]. The mean ages of the participants ranged from 3.8 [ 34 ] to 7.4 years [ 35 ], and all of the studies included both boys and girls, apart from two studies that only included the former [ 36 , 37 ].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Three of the studies [ 38 , 39 , 40 ] included two intervention programs that met the eligibility criteria, and thus, were analyzed separately. A total of 14 intervention programs focused on FMS only interventions [ 30 , 31 , 38 , 39 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 ], PA only interventions [ 35 , 40 ], or FMS and PA only interventions [ 32 , 45 ], while 11 programs combined FMS [ 3 , 21 , 33 , 36 , 37 , 46 , 47 ], PA [ 34 , 48 ], or FMS and PA [ 40 , 49 ] with cognitive or academic skill practices. Intervention duration ranged from five weeks [ 35 ] to one academic year [ 3 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 41 , 45 ].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Youth with NDDs may be experiencing impaired cognition and at risk of developing maladaptive emotion regulation; thus, existing treatment plans may benefit from inclusion of specific assessments and approaches that aim to strengthen cognitive control early in development. For example, cognitive remediation interventions implemented as adjunct interventions may be helpful (Chevalier et al, 2017; Kim et al, 2018). Chevalier et al (2017) used a motor‐cognitive remediation programme in preschoolers at risk of ADHD and were able to improve inhibitory control and selective attention in the experimental group.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, cognitive remediation interventions implemented as adjunct interventions may be helpful (Chevalier et al, 2017; Kim et al, 2018). Chevalier et al (2017) used a motor‐cognitive remediation programme in preschoolers at risk of ADHD and were able to improve inhibitory control and selective attention in the experimental group. Interventions are also needed to reduce children's reactivity to emotion‐inducing cues and to teach them strategies for faster recovery from negative emotional experiences.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%