Effects of occupational therapy - led fine motor centers on fine motor skills of preschool-aged children: An evidence-based program evaluation

Kaylyn Buzzell, Jenna Feeney, Lauren Gentile, Sara Morris, Stacey Webster, Ellen Herlache-Pretzer
{"title":"Effects of occupational therapy - led fine motor centers on fine motor skills of preschool-aged children: An evidence-based program evaluation","authors":"Kaylyn Buzzell, Jenna Feeney, Lauren Gentile, Sara Morris, Stacey Webster, Ellen Herlache-Pretzer","doi":"10.1080/19411243.2021.1914268","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Aim: This program evaluation examined the effects of occupational therapy (OT)-led fine motor centers (FMCs) on the fine motor skills of typically-developing preschool-aged children. Methods: This program evaluation was completed with 29 children from two preschool Great Start Readiness Program classrooms. The experimental group received OT-led FMCs twice per week for 8 weeks; the control group continued with their regular curriculum. The fine motor subtest of the Miller Function and Participation Scales (M-FUN) was used to collect data regarding fine motor skills pre- and post- intervention and 6 weeks post-intervention. A two-way mixed ANOVA was utilized for data analysis. Results: Baseline M-FUN scores of the control and experimental group at pre-test were not significantly different (p>0.067). There was a significant difference between the groups at post-test and follow-up testing (p<0.006, p<0.001). The experimental group demonstrated significant differences in M-FUN scores pre- to post-test, post-test to follow-up, and pre-test to follow-up (p<0.000, p<0.000, p<0.026); there was no significant difference in control group M-FUN scores pre- to post-test or post-test to follow-up (p>0.090, p>0.060). There was a significant difference in control group scores pre-test to follow-up (p<0.011). Additionally, 85.7% of participants in the experimental group had fine motor delays at pre-test; at follow-up testing, only 7% had delays. Eighty-six percent of control group participants had fine motor delays at pre-test; 53.3% of participants still had delays at follow-up testing. Conclusion: OT-led FMCs in preschool classrooms may improve fine motor skills of preschool-aged students; additional research with a larger sample size is suggested.","PeriodicalId":92676,"journal":{"name":"Journal of occupational therapy, schools & early intervention","volume":"6 1","pages":"248 - 256"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of occupational therapy, schools & early intervention","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19411243.2021.1914268","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT Aim: This program evaluation examined the effects of occupational therapy (OT)-led fine motor centers (FMCs) on the fine motor skills of typically-developing preschool-aged children. Methods: This program evaluation was completed with 29 children from two preschool Great Start Readiness Program classrooms. The experimental group received OT-led FMCs twice per week for 8 weeks; the control group continued with their regular curriculum. The fine motor subtest of the Miller Function and Participation Scales (M-FUN) was used to collect data regarding fine motor skills pre- and post- intervention and 6 weeks post-intervention. A two-way mixed ANOVA was utilized for data analysis. Results: Baseline M-FUN scores of the control and experimental group at pre-test were not significantly different (p>0.067). There was a significant difference between the groups at post-test and follow-up testing (p<0.006, p<0.001). The experimental group demonstrated significant differences in M-FUN scores pre- to post-test, post-test to follow-up, and pre-test to follow-up (p<0.000, p<0.000, p<0.026); there was no significant difference in control group M-FUN scores pre- to post-test or post-test to follow-up (p>0.090, p>0.060). There was a significant difference in control group scores pre-test to follow-up (p<0.011). Additionally, 85.7% of participants in the experimental group had fine motor delays at pre-test; at follow-up testing, only 7% had delays. Eighty-six percent of control group participants had fine motor delays at pre-test; 53.3% of participants still had delays at follow-up testing. Conclusion: OT-led FMCs in preschool classrooms may improve fine motor skills of preschool-aged students; additional research with a larger sample size is suggested.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
以职业治疗为主导的精细运动中心对学龄前儿童精细运动技能的影响:基于证据的项目评估
摘要目的:本项目评估研究了作业治疗(OT)主导的精细运动中心(fmc)对正常发展的学龄前儿童精细运动技能的影响。方法:对来自两个学前班“伟大开始准备计划”教室的29名儿童进行评估。实验组每周2次接受ot引导的fmc治疗,共8周;对照组继续他们的常规课程。采用Miller函数和参与量表(M-FUN)的精细运动子测试收集干预前后和干预后6周的精细运动技能数据。采用双向混合方差分析进行数据分析。结果:对照组与实验组前测基线M-FUN评分差异无统计学意义(p>0.067)。两组间测后与随访比较差异有统计学意义(p0.090, p>0.060)。对照组前测与随访评分差异有统计学意义(p<0.011)。此外,85.7%的实验组受试者在前测时出现精细动作延迟;在后续测试中,只有7%的患者出现延迟。86%的对照组参与者在前测试中有精细运动迟缓;53.3%的参与者在后续测试中仍有延迟。结论:ot引导的幼儿课堂fmc可以提高学龄前儿童的精细运动技能;建议进行更大样本量的额外研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Let down by Low Expectations: A Qualitative Interview/participatory Photography Study of Feeding Problems in Autistic Children Executive Functioning in the Schools: Perspectives from Occupational Therapists Occupational therapy intervention to address handwriting deficit in elementary-aged school children: How to, how much, and how often? A scoping review A Pilot Study on Efficacy of a Play-Based Social Skills Training Group for First-Grade Elementary Children with Autism in Taiwan How can we evaluate collaborative practices in inclusive schools? Challenges and proposed solutions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1