Griffiths Alison, Toovey Rachel, Morgan Prue E, Spittle Alicia J
Department of Physiotherapy, School of Primary and Allied Health Care, Monash University, Frankston, Victoria, Australia.
Department of Physiotherapy, The Royal Children's Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
BMJ Open. 2018 Oct 27;8(10):e021734. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-021734.
Gross motor assessment tools have a critical role in identifying, diagnosing and evaluating motor difficulties in childhood. The objective of this review was to systematically evaluate the psychometric properties and clinical utility of gross motor assessment tools for children aged 2-12 years.
A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and AMED was performed between May and July 2017. Methodological quality was assessed with the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments checklist and an outcome measures rating form was used to evaluate reliability, validity and clinical utility of assessment tools.
Seven assessment tools from 37 studies/manuals met the inclusion criteria: Bayley Scale of Infant and Toddler Development-III (Bayley-III), Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency-2 (BOT-2), Movement Assessment Battery for Children-2 (MABC-2), McCarron Assessment of Neuromuscular Development (MAND), Neurological Sensory Motor Developmental Assessment (NSMDA), Peabody Developmental Motor Scales-2 (PDMS-2) and Test of Gross Motor Development-2 (TGMD-2). Methodological quality varied from poor to excellent. Validity and internal consistency varied from fair to excellent (α=0.5-0.99). The Bayley-III, NSMDA and MABC-2 have evidence of predictive validity. Test-retest reliability is excellent in the BOT-2 (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)=0.80-0.99), PDMS-2 (ICC=0.97), MABC-2 (ICC=0.83-0.96) and TGMD-2 (ICC=0.81-0.92). TGMD-2 has the highest inter-rater (ICC=0.88-0.93) and intrarater reliability (ICC=0.92-0.99).
The majority of gross motor assessments for children have good-excellent validity. Test-retest reliability is highest in the BOT-2, MABC-2, PDMS-2 and TGMD-2. The Bayley-III has the best predictive validity at 2 years of age for later motor outcome. None of the assessment tools demonstrate good evaluative validity. Further research on evaluative gross motor assessment tools are urgently needed.
粗大运动评估工具在识别、诊断和评估儿童期运动困难方面具有关键作用。本综述的目的是系统评价2至12岁儿童粗大运动评估工具的心理测量特性和临床效用。
2017年5月至7月对MEDLINE、Embase、CINAHL和AMED进行了系统检索。采用基于共识的健康状况测量工具选择标准清单评估方法学质量,并使用结果测量评分表评估评估工具的信度、效度和临床效用。
37项研究/手册中的7种评估工具符合纳入标准:贝利婴幼儿发展量表第三版(Bayley-III)、布鲁因inks-奥塞茨基运动技能测试第二版(BOT-2)、儿童运动评估量表第二版(MABC-2)、麦卡伦神经肌肉发育评估(MAND)、神经感觉运动发育评估(NSMDA)、皮博迪发展运动量表第二版(PDMS-2)和粗大运动发展测试第二版(TGMD-2)。方法学质量从差到优不等。效度和内部一致性从一般到优秀(α=0.5-0.99)。Bayley-III、NSMDA和MABC-2有预测效度的证据。BOT-2(组内相关系数(ICC)=0.80-0.99)、PDMS-2(ICC=0.97)、MABC-2(ICC=0.83-0.96)和TGMD-2(ICC=0.81-0.92)的重测信度极佳。TGMD-2具有最高的评分者间信度(ICC=0.88-0.93)和评分者内信度(ICC=0.92-0.99)。
大多数儿童粗大运动评估具有良好至优秀的效度。BOT-2、MABC-2、PDMS-2和TGMD-2的重测信度最高。Bayley-III在2岁时对后期运动结果具有最佳的预测效度。没有一种评估工具显示出良好的评估效度。迫切需要对评估性粗大运动评估工具进行进一步研究。