Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2021 Nov 22:8:2333794X211057707.
doi: 10.1177/2333794X211057707. eCollection 2021.

School Based Motor Skill Interventions for Developmentally Delayed and Non-Delayed Children

Affiliations
Review

School Based Motor Skill Interventions for Developmentally Delayed and Non-Delayed Children

Colby J C Bryce. Glob Pediatr Health. .

Abstract

Introduction: A mere 33% of all children meet the recommended minimum physical activity guidelines for adequate health maintenance. Available literature however suggests children are more likely to be active when they are competent with their own motor ability. This review aimed to evaluate how several regimented motor skills training courses and interventions improve motor skill competence among children compared with age matched control peers. Method: Electronic databases were searched and included Medline Complete and Psych INFO (both hosted by EBSCO Host). The search syntax examined titles and abstracts. The study aimed to create novelty by examining participants with and without developmental delays simultaneously from studies around the globe. Included interventions were aimed at the most crucial developmental years for children (between 3 and 11 years). Results: Results were found in favor of the motor skill intervention groups (from pre-to post-test). Included interventions involved weekly motor skills exposure of 60 to 120 minutes for periods of between 2 and 6 months. Over 50% of included interventions involved alterations to current school curriculums. The included studies were of moderate to high quality. Conclusion: The findings suggest that for those with and without developmental delays, several interventions can be effectively applied in once weekly 60-minute sessions (over eight or more weeks) to improve children's motor skill abilities. Applying appropriate difficulty to interventions seems equally influential. Implications are discussed.

Keywords: child; children; intervention; motor ability; motor skills; physical activity; systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
PRISMA flowchart. Source: Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG; The PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000097. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097. For more information, visit www.prisma-statement.org.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). Australian health survey: physical activity. 2013. Accessed April 10, 2017. http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/content/health-pub...
    1. Janssen I, LeBlanc AG. Systematic review of the health benefits of physical activity and fitness in school-aged children and youth. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2010;7(1):40. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Barnett LM, van Beurden E, Morgan PJ, Brooks LO, Beard JR. Childhood motor skill proficiency as a predictor of adolescent physical activity. J Adolesc Health. 2009;44(3):252-259. - PubMed
    1. Kriemler S, Meyer U, Martin E, van Sluijs EM, Andersen LB, Martin BW. Effect of school-based interventions on physical activity and fitness in children and adolescents: a review of reviews and systematic update. Br J Sports Med. 2011;45(11):923-930. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Beets MW, Weaver RG, Ioannidis JPA, et al.. Identification and evaluation of risk of generalizability biases in pilot versus efficacy/effectiveness trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2020;17:19. 10.1186/s12966-020-0918-y - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources