Skip to content

Developmental coordination disorder – do personnel and environment impact on intervention outcomes for this condition?

Does the personnel delivering intervention and the environment of intervention impact on motor and psychosocial outcomes for children with Developmental Coordination Disorder (DCD)?

Status
Completed
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ANZCTR
Registry ID
ACTRN12614000106639
Enrollment
93
Registered
2014-01-29
Start date
2006-07-14
Completion date
2007-03-05
Last updated
2020-01-13

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

None listed

Brief summary

Intervention for Developmental Coordination Disorder (DCD) has been shown to be better than no intervention, however there is scarce information on the delivery of all types of intervention. This study compares different personnel and environments in service delivery. Ninety-three children from 13 South Australian schools, aged five to eight years (at time of recruitment) were recruited to participate in this RCT. Participants received a group intervention running for 13 weeks, working on fine and gross motor skills. Schools were randomised using cluster randomisation to receive one of three modes of delivery. Group one schools received the program at school run by a school assistant, group two received the program in school run by a physiotherapist and group three received the intervention in a health clinic run by a physiotherapist. Group three was considered the control group for delivery as the literature concludes group programs run by health professionals in a health setting have success in treating children with DCD. Participants were assessed pre and post-intervention, and six months after the program completion. The Movement Assessment Battery for Children (MABC), Test of Gross Motor Development – Second Edition (TGMD-2), Pictorial Scale of Perceived Competence and Social Acceptance for Young Children (PSPCSA) and the School Function Assessment (SFA) were used to assess participants, while parent and child questionnaires were used to gain information on more practical aspects of service delivery.

Interventions

All participants received a group based task specific motor intervention in which they attended a one hour session once a week for 13 weeks. The one hour seession included gross motor and fine motor activities which were developmentally appropriate for 5- 8 year olds. The basis of task specific intervention is practising the task itself under different conditions rather than focussing on impairments which contribute to difficulties with task. Each group had a maximum of 6 participants and had

All participants received a group based task specific motor intervention in which they attended a one hour session once a week for 13 weeks. The one hour seession included gross motor and fine motor activities which were developmentally appropriate for 5- 8 year olds. The basis of task specific intervention is practising the task itself under different conditions rather than focussing on impairments which contribute to difficulties with task. Each group had a maximum of 6 participants and had a staff to participant ratio of 1:3. There were three intervention modes which were compared. One mode was run by a physiotherapist in a health clinic setting, a second mode was run by a physiotherapist in a school setting and a third mode was run by a school assistant in a school setting.

Sponsors

University of South Australia
Lead SponsorUniversity

Study design

Allocation
Randomised controlled trial
Intervention model
Parallel
Primary purpose
Treatment
Masking
Blinded (masking used) (Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
All
Age
5 Years to 9 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

Children aged 5- 8 years meeting DSM-IV-TR criteria for Developmental Coordination Disorder

Exclusion criteria

Intellectual Disability and Autism

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ANZCTR · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026