學齡前兒童動作發展評估量表之初步研究：開發與驗證

Preliminary Studies of the Developmental Motor Assessment Scale for Preschool Children: Development and Validation

柏憶涵(Yi‐Han Po) ； 陳嘉玲(Chia‐Ling Chen) ； 張鑑如(Chien‐Ju Chang) ； 陳柏熹(Po‐Hsi Chen) ； 陳協慶(Hsieh‐Ching Chen) ； 鍾佳英(Chia‐Ying Chung) ； 汪家琦(Chia‐Chi Wang) ； 傅仁煇(Ren‐Huei Fu) ； 周麗端(Li‐Tuan Chou)

《台灣復健醫學雜誌》 44卷2期 (2016/06) Pp. 71-80

https://doi.org/10.6315/2016.44(2)02

摘要

國外已發展專門施測學齡前動作發展評估量表，而目前國內並無學齡前粗大動作及精細動作之完整評估量表，因此本研究的目的在開發一份本土化的學齡前兒童動作發展評估量表。本研究為橫斷性研究，共招募了177位正常發展之嬰幼兒(91位男生、86位女生)，其中有54位在一周內再進行學齡前兒童動作發展評估量表之評估，並隨機挑選24位接受皮巴迪動作量表第二版的臨床評估。學齡前兒童動作發展評估量表分為粗大動作和精細動作兩大部分，粗大動作包括穩定度、移位以及身體協調三個向度；精細動作包含抓握、手部操作以及視動整合三個向度。本研究使用試題反應理論檢測題目的難度估計值、均方誤，瞭解題目的適配度，進行量表的修訂。在信度方面，使用Cronbach's α瞭解量表的內部一致性和組內相關係數評斷再測信度；效度方面，使用專家效度評估題目內容，並以皮巴迪動作量表第二版作為效標關聯效度，使用皮爾森相關係數來檢測。另外，以每12個月為一組，使用ANOVA比較各年齡組間差異。刪題後，粗大動作為108題，整體難度估計值介於-9.024～9.59；精細動作為111題，整體難度估計值介於-7.056～6.85。信度研究結果顯示，內部一致性介於0.937～0.989、再測信度介於0.975～0.993，表示具有良好的一致性和穩定性；在效度方面，專家效度介於0.659～1.000；皮巴迪動作量表第二版與學齡前兒童動作發展評估量表呈中高程度相關(r=0.735～0.984, p＜0.01)。比較不同年齡層此量表之平均分數，其粗大動作、精細動作以及整體動作分數，在各年齡組皆有顯著差異(p＜0.01)。本研究初步開發的學齡前兒童動作發展評估量表具有良好的信效度，且可分辨出不同年齡層兒童之動作發展，表示此量表在臨床上具有可行性，而本研究為初步結果，未來可再增加收案人數再進行驗證。

關鍵字

學齡前兒童(preschool children) ； 動作發展評估量表(developmental motor assessment scale) ； 試題反應理論(item response theory) ； 信度(reliability) ； 效度(validity)

並列摘要

Many countries have developed comprehensive developmental motor assessment scale for preschool children (DMASPC). At present, there is no comprehensive gross motor and fine motor assessment scales for preschool children in Taiwan. The purpose of this study is to develop a DMASPC specifically for Taiwanese preschool children. This study is a cross-sectional study. One hundred and seventy-seven children with typical development (91 boys and 86 girls) were enrolled and received the DMASPC test. Fifty-four of the recruited children then received a second DMASPC test within the first week after recruitment, while the other 24 children were randomly selected and received clinical assessment of Peabody Developmental Motor Scales, Second Edition(PDMS-2). The DMASPC is divided into two parts: gross motor and fine motor. The gross motor assessment includes three domains: stability, locomotion and coordination. The fine motor assessment contains three domains: grasp, hand manipulation and visual-motor integration. This study used item response theory to determine the estimation of item difficulty, mean square error, item goodness-of-fit and the revision of the scale. In regards to reliability, Cronbach's α and the intra-class correlation coefficient were used to assess the internal consistency of the scale and the test-retest reliability respectively. In terms of validity, item contents were evaluated based on the expert validity in this study. The PDMS-2 was used as the criterion-related validity and correlation was evaluated using the Pearson correlation coefficient. Participants were classified into six age groups. ANOVA was used to compare the differences between each age group. After deleting items, the gross motor assessment has 108 items and an estimation of overall litem difficulty between -9.024 and 9.59. The fine motor assessment has 111 items and an estimation of overall litem difficulty between -7.056 and 6.85. The reliability results show that the internal consistency ranges from 0.937 to 0.989 and the test-retest reliability ranges from 0.975 to 0.993, indicating satisfactory consistency and stability respectively. In terms of validity, the expert validity is between 0.659 and 1.000 and the criterion-related validity of PDMS-2 is moderately to highly correlated with DMASPC(r= 0.735-0.984, p＜0.01). Comparing the average scores of different age groups, the scores for the gross motor, fine motor and overall motor functions are significantly different between each age group (p ＜0.01). In summary, the DMASPC has good reliability and validity and can distinguish the differences in motor development between age groups. This means that the scale is feasible in clinical practice. This study presents the preliminary results only and verification in the future requires further recruitment of subjects.

並列關鍵字

preschool children ； developmental motor assessment scale ； item response theory ； reliability ； validity

參考文獻

4. Piek JP, Baynam GB, Barrett NC. The relationship between fine and gross motor ability, self-perceptions and self-worth in children and adolescents. Human Movement Science 2006;25(1):65-75.

5. Barela JA. Fundamental motor skill proficiency is necessary for children's motor activity inclusion. Motriz, Rio Claro 2013;19(3):548-51.

6. Bardid F, Deconinck FJA, Descamps S, et al. The effectiveness of a fundamental motor skill intervention in pre-schoolers with motor problems depends on gender but not environmental context. Research in Developmental Disabilities 2013;34(12):4571-81.

7. Deitz JC, Kartin D, Kopp K. Review of the Bruininks-Oseretsky test of motor proficiency, Second Endition (BOT-2). Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics 2007;27(4);87-102.

8. Case-Smith J, Heaphy T, Marr D, et al. Fine motor and functional performance outcomes in preschool children. American Journal of Occupational Therapy 1998;52(10):788-96.