Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 21 items for :

  • "Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency" x
  • Psychology and Behavior in Sport/Exercise x
  • Refine by Access: All Content x
Clear All
Restricted access

Eva D’Hondt, Fotini Venetsanou, Antonis Kambas, and Matthieu Lenoir

KörperKoordinations Test für Kinder (KTK; Kiphard & Schilling, 1974 , 2007 ), focusing on gross motor coordination but not evaluating any object control or fine motor skills. Accordingly, the Short Form of the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency, Second Edition (BOT-2 SF; Bruininks & Bruininks, 2005

Restricted access

Zeinab Khodaverdi, Abbas Bahram, Hassan Khalaji, Anoshirvan Kazemnejad, Farhad Ghadiri, and Wesley O’Brien

, 2016 ); Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency, second edition (BOT-2 Short Form [SF]; Bruininks & Bruininks, 2005 ); Körperkoordinationtest Für Kinder (KTK; Kiphard & Schilling, 1974 , 2007b ); and Movement Assessment Battery for Children-2 (MABC-2). Although these tools are used for

Restricted access

Melvin Ibana and Priscila Caçola

Handwriting is a core deficit in children with developmental coordination disorder (DCD). Fifty children were tested with the Movement Assessment Battery for Children, Second Edition; Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency, Short Form; Evaluation Tool of Children's Handwriting (ETCH); McMaster Handwriting Assessment Protocol; and Beery-Buktenica Test of Visual–Motor Integration (Beery–VMI–6). The results showed significant differences in components of the ETCH between groups (p < .05) and significant relationships between handwriting (ETCH and Beery–VMI–6) and motor ability measures (r > .30). We conclude that the ETCH and the Beery–VMI–6 are sensitive measures of handwriting ability for children with probable DCD, but more research is needed to identify a gold-standard assessment for evaluating handwriting in this population.

Restricted access

Laura Spivey Kabiri, Katy Mitchell, Wayne Brewer, and Alexis Ortiz

Almost 2 million American children are homeschooled but no information is currently available regarding motor skill proficiency within this population. The purpose of this research was to describe motor skill proficiency among homeschooled children and assess differences in homeschooled subgroups. This crosssectional study screened 73 homeschooled children aged 5–8 years for overall motor skill proficiency using the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency, Second Edition, Short Form (BOT-2 SF). Independent t tests examined differences in motor skill proficiency within the homeschooled population. Mann-Whitney U tests examined differences in motor skill proficiency classification within significantly different subgroups. Homeschooled children demonstrated average motor proficiency. Significantly different motor proficiency was seen among homeschooled children participating in 3 or more hours of organized sports per week, t(71) = 2.805, p = .006, 95% CI = 1.77, 10.49, and whose primary caregiver was employed versus unemployed, t(71) = –3.875, p < .001, 95% CI = –13.29, –4.26. Mann-Whitney U tests revealed significantly different motor skill proficiency classification in these same subgroups. Overall, homeschooling showed no detrimental effect on motor skill proficiency. Participation in 3 or more hours of organized sports per week or having an unemployed primary caregiver may improve motor skill proficiency among this population.

Restricted access

Guilherme M. Cesar, Rebecca Lewthwaite, and Susan M. Sigward

.02 ± 1.88 73.96 ± 1.97 Foot length (cm) 22.02 ± 0.56 27.22 ± 0.23 Physical Activity: Total a 728.00 ± 108.37 376.25 ± 57.33 Physical Activity: Run, Cut, and Stop Categories a 427.50 ± 91.45 45.63 ± 15.94 Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency b 25.52 ± 0.53 n/a a Minutes per week. b Locomotor

Restricted access

Nadia Cristina Valentini, Glauber Carvalho Nobre, Mariele Santayana de Souza, and Michael J. Duncan

was obtained from each participant. Health-Related Fitness Endurance and strength were assessed using individual subtests of the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency-2. 37 Endurance was measured using the running speed and agility subtest of the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency

Restricted access

Nadia Cristina Valentini, Glauber Carvalho Nobre, Larissa Wagner Zanella, Keila G. Pereira, Maicon Rodrigues Albuquerque, and Mary Elizabeth Rudisill

. Another motor assessment that incorporates a screening test, is the Bruininks–Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency (BOT-2). This screening test was developed from the original long-form version and has limited validity evidence ( Bruininks & Bruininks, 2005 ; Lucas et al., 2013 ). Several studies reported

Restricted access

Daniela G.L. Terson de Paleville and Jason C. Immekus

quarter of the academic year. Equipment and Instrumentation The Bruininks–Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency Second Edition (BOT-2) 35 short version was used to measure motor proficiency. The BOT-2 is a validated instrument of motor proficiency utilizing a series of tasks designed to measure fine motor

Restricted access

Rose M. Angell, Stephen A. Butterfield, Shihfen Tu, E. Michael Loovis, Craig A. Mason, and Christopher J. Nightingale

frequently use instruments such as the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency ( Bruninks, 1978 ) or clinical batteries that include such items as push-ups, standing long jump, and 20-m sprints. These instruments or clinical assessments are heavily weighted with items that involve significant

Restricted access

Dimitrios Aivazidis, Fotini Venetsanou, Nikolaos Aggeloussis, Vassilios Gourgoulis, and Antonis Kambas

KTK moderately correlates ( r  = .61–.64) with the short form of the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency, 43 and Pavlidou et al 44 reported that the test–retest reliability of the KTK in children aged 4.5–5.5 years is sufficiently supported. MC assessments were performed, like the PA