...
首页> 外文期刊>Child: care, health and development >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
【24h】

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

机译:对随机和病例对照试验的系统审查调查3至12岁儿童的学校运动技能干预措施的有效性

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

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.
机译:背景研究表明,通过职业和物理治疗服务提供的电机技能受损的儿童可以响应良好的强化治疗干预措施。然而,需要探索传统的推荐诊所环境之外提供替代方法,因为有限的资源意味着这种卫生服务往往难以满足需求。本综述列出了系统地评估了针对提高3至12岁以下儿童运动技能的基于学校的干预措施的证据。方法五,从2012年1月至2018年1月在2012年1月至7月期间发表的同伴审查的文章中搜索了五种电子数据库。如果他们实施了一个随机或案例的学校的运动技能干预,研究有资格符合条件 - 控制的试验设计,客观地测量了运动技能作为结果,这些结果并不特定于运动或体育技能。参与者必须年龄在3至12岁之间,没有人患有影响肌肉功能的神经疾病。使用偏置工具的Cochrane风险评估偏差风险。结果二十三项研究达到了纳入标准。这些研究包括针对培训的干预:基本运动技能,手写,精细和全球运动技能。这些研究的大多数报告了对电机功能的有益影响,但一些干预措施也会评估对活动和参与的后续影响(但不福祉)。许多研究具有方法论缺点,意味着这些结果需要谨慎地解释。结论学校似乎是运动技能干预的有效环境,但有利程度可能取决于干预类型。此外,需要确认是否福利在日常活动中超越电机功能,参与和福祉。未来的研究应包括评估基于学校干预措施的长期疗效的后续措施。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号