School of Occupational Therapy, Hebrew University Hadassah Medical School, Jerusalem, Israel.
Res Dev Disabil. 2012 Nov-Dec;33(6):2193-202. doi: 10.1016/j.ridd.2012.06.005. Epub 2012 Jul 10.
We assessed the non-academic and academic functioning of young adults with DCD, and investigated the emotional influences and the role of strategy use within this population. A random sample of 2379 adolescents and young adults aged 19-25 (1081 males [45.4%]; mean age=20.68, SD=3.42) was used to develop the instruments. From this sample, three study groups were identified (n=429) based on the Adolescents & Adults Coordination Questionnaire: probable DCD (n=135; 67.2% males), suspected borderline DCD (n=149; 51.4% males) and control (145; 70.5% males). Participants completed the Daily Life Functions Questionnaire (assessing non-academic and academic functioning), the Recent Emotional State Test (assessing feelings resulting from task performance), the Internal Factors Attributed to Success Questionnaire and the Problem Solving Questionnaire to assess strategy and executive strategy use. A MANOVA revealed statistically significant differences between-groups (F[7,422]=16.19; p<.001; η=.197); post hoc analyses revealed differences for all measures (except the Problem Solving Questionnaire), with the probable DCD and suspected borderline DCD groups performing worse than controls. Severity of motor deficits was correlated with all outcomes except strategy use. Logistic regression revealed that non-academic functioning was the most significant predictor of group placement (B=-1.32; p<.001); academic functioning/handwriting was the second most significant predictor (B=0.44; p=.047). Deficits in motor coordination continue into adulthood and have an effect on academic and non-academic function, as well as on the emotional state of the individual.
我们评估了 DCD 青少年的非学术和学术功能,并研究了该人群中的情绪影响和策略使用的作用。使用 19-25 岁的青少年和年轻人的随机样本(1081 名男性[45.4%];平均年龄=20.68,SD=3.42)来开发工具。从这个样本中,根据青少年和成年人协调问卷确定了三个研究组(n=429):可能的 DCD(n=135;67.2%的男性)、疑似边缘 DCD(n=149;51.4%的男性)和对照组(145;70.5%的男性)。参与者完成了日常生活功能问卷(评估非学术和学术功能)、近期情绪状态测试(评估任务表现产生的感觉)、归因于成功的内部因素问卷和解决问题问卷,以评估策略和执行策略的使用。MANOVA 显示组间存在统计学上的显著差异(F[7,422]=16.19;p<.001;η=.197);事后分析显示所有测量结果均存在差异(除解决问题问卷外),可能的 DCD 和疑似边缘 DCD 组的表现均不如对照组。运动缺陷的严重程度与所有结果相关,除了策略使用。逻辑回归显示非学术功能是分组的最显著预测因素(B=-1.32;p<.001);学术功能/书写是第二重要的预测因素(B=0.44;p=.047)。运动协调缺陷持续到成年期,对学术和非学术功能以及个体的情绪状态都有影响。