Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
INTRODUCTION
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is a psychiatric disorder
of childhood, characterised by inattentiveness, impulsivity and motor overac-
tivity which exceeds developmental expectations (American Psychiatric
Association, 1994; Berry, Shaywitz & Shaywitz, 1985; Cantwell & Baker,
1991; Hesterly, 1986). ADHD follows a chronic course, affects between 3%
Doyle Wallen and Whitmont
METHOD
Subjects
All children attending the outpatient Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD)
Clinic at Westmead Hospital in Sydney (Australia) during 1992 and 1993
participated in the study. Children with ADHD were referred to the clinic
and occupational therapy assessment of motor skills was a routine part of the
multidisciplinary team involvement. The children included 33 boys (87%)
and five girls in the age range 7-12 years. Mean age was 9 years 7 months
(S.D. 1 year 2 months). All children fulfilled the DSM-IIIR (American Psy
chiatric Association, 1987) criteria for ADHD when assessed by clinic staff
(pediatrician, child psychiatrist, clinical psychologist). This diagnosis was sup
ported by a parent or teacher behaviour report in the clinical or borderline
range, using the Child Behavior Checklist (Achenbach & Edelbrock, 1983,
1986) and The Conners' Rating Scales (Goyette, Conners & Ulrich, 1978).
Had these children been screened using the more recent DSM-IV (1994) edi
tion, all would fulfil criteria for the combined type of ADHD: that is, they
showed behaviours which reflect problems with sustained attention, as well as
problems with activity level and impulsive responding. The majority of chil
dren showed intellectual ability in the average range on either WISC-R,
WISC-III (Wechsler, 1974, 1991), or Stanford-Binet IV (Thorndike, Hagen
& Sattler, 1986). Only one child showed a Full Scale IQ below 80 (see Table
1). By contrast, nearly half the sample had learning problems, indicated by
one or more achievement scores in the boVderline range or below on the Wide
Range Achievement Test - Revised (a measure of spelling, reading and arith
metic) (Jastak & Wilkinson, 1984).
Borderline (70-79) 3 1
Low average (80-89) 14 5
Average (90-109) 51 19
High average (110-119) 27 10
Superior (120-129) 5 2
80.95 12.75
Category Percentage
(Range) of children
*WRAT-R standardisation mean == 100, S.D = 15. Subtests: oral reading, written spelling,
and written arithmetic.
• Parents' motor skill rating. Each parent was asked to rate their child for
gross and fine motor skills (five point scale: well coordinated to very
uncoordinated), and for handwriting (four point scale: above average to
very poor).
• Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Profiäency (BOTMP) (Bruininks, 1978).
The Fine Motor Composite and The Short Form from this test were used.
The Short Form was included as a brief survey of general motor ability
(Moore, Reeve & Boan, 1986; Verderber & Payne, 1987). It was interpret-
Motor skills in children with attention deficit hyperactiviry disorder
Analysis
The proportion of children showing scores within defined categories was cal
culated for parent ratings of motor skills, the BOTMP and the QNST. Corre
lational analyses were conducted over all variables, including a weighted
measure of ADHD severity derived subsequently from ADD Clinic ratings of
symptom severity. The weighted measure was based on DSM-IIIR criteria and
reflected the parent's report about the presence of each symptom. The weights
available were: Not Present (1); Sometimes Present (2); Present Quite a Lot
(3); Constant Feature (4).
Results
Approximately one third of the children were judged by their parents to be
uncoordinated on ratings of both gross and fine motor skills. Of those judged
to be uncoordinated, most fell in the 'mild' category, with only 3% drawing
Doyle Wallen and Whitmont
Table 4 shows the Means and Standard Deviations for the several Bru-
ininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency scaled scores. For the Fine Motor
Composite and the Short Form (estimating gross motor skills), only 8% and
5% respectively fell in the 'Below Average' range. More children fell in the
'Above Average' category on the Short Form than on the Fine Motor Com
posite, again suggesting stronger gross motor skills. Direct paired sample t-test
comparison of means indicates a significant difference, with better perfor
mance in the gross motor domain (t = 3.797, p = 0.001).
Performance on the Quick Neurological Screening Test was consistent
Mean 76 86 21 19 16
(S.D.) 27.22 23.18 6.79 3.54 5.83
Above average 61 82 68 53 26
Average 32 13 21 45 50
Below average 8 5 11 3 24
with the BOTMP outcome (particularly the Short Form), revealing a neuro-
logically intact sample for the most part. In brief, 84% of the sample fell in
the normal range. A moderate, significant association was noted between the
two scales of the BOTMP and the QNST (see Table 5). Qualitatively, QNST
items presenting the most difficulty for children with ADHD were the Left-
Right Discrimination task and Behavioural Irregularities (41% and 35%
falling in the 'Suspicious' or 'At Risk' categories, respectively).
TABLE 5: Quick Neurological Screening Test: Classification of participant children and
association with the BOTMP
Mean* 17
S.D. 9.04
Performance categories **
Normal (0-25) 84%
Suspicious (26-50) 16%
High Risk (>50) 0%
Bruininks-Oseretsky
Fine motor Short form
Correlations*** -0.39 -0.49
QNST x BOTMP (f> = 0.02) (p = 0.003)
* Scale range: 0-148; higher scores indicate less competence; 0-25 considered normal.
** Proportion of participants ailing in each QNST category.
*** Negative association: competency indicated by high scores on BOTMP, low scores on
QNST.
post facto analysis found a significant group difference for only one motor
variable: BOTMP Short Form performance was better in the group medicated
during assessment.
DISCUSSION
This study found several outcomes of importance. First, an unexpectedly low
proportion of children with ADHD showed motor difficulties on objective,
standardised measures. Barkley (1990) estimates over 50% of samples will
show motor difficulties, but in the present sample less than 10% showed
'Below Average' scores on the BOTMP. This could be explained by several
factors, including the possibility that the extent of motor involvement has
been generally overestimated through relying on non-standardised tests, clini
cal judgment, or parent report. The impression of clumsiness, for example, is
easily confounded by hurried, impulsive activity. Another very real possibility
is that a predominantly inattentive subtype of children with ADHD (not pre
sent in the current sample) are those most at risk for motor involvement. Any
suggestion that the BOTMP is insensitive to a form of motor difficulty experi
enced by children with ADHD seems unlikely, in view of the wide range of
motor skills demanded for BOTMP performance. Other explanations, which
may be discarded on the basis of correlational analyses and/or direct compari
son, are medication status and ADHD severity. A remaining possibility is that
the relatively old BOTMP (1978) scaled scores and categories overestimate
motor ability due to sample cohort effects. This can be answered by inclusion
of a normal control group and is currently under investigation (Whitmont &
Clark, in press).
A second important outcome of the study is that the Australian sample
shows the same profile reported for samples of children with ADHD in other
parts of the world; that is, relatively poor handwriting skills on parent report
Motor skills in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder
and generally better gross than fine motor performance (Stewart et al., 1966;
Szatmari et al., 1989). Children in the present sample had significantly poorer
BOTMP Fine Motor Composite scores than they did Short Form scores (the
Short Form was used to estimate gross motor skills). Although a standardised
measure of handwriting skill was not used, parent ratings suggested that hand
writing was the most dysfunctional of the motor domains (58% rated as 'poor'
or 'very poor')· While the meaning of this profile is not entirely clear, the
finding is consistent with the suggestion that fine motor skills (especially
handwriting) make greater demands for sustained attention and effortful
activity, capacities which are already problematic in the child with ADHD.
The third major finding of the study is that there was a clear discrepancy
between parent ratings of coordination and the standardised scores. There are
two potential sources of such a discrepancy. First, there may be a difference
between a child's ability and performance: the child may appear to be clumsy
(based on hyperactive, impulsive and inattentive behaviour), but not actually
be clumsy as a result of motor dysfunction. In brief, the symptoms of ADHD
may interfere with the presentation of adequate motor performance. This
position is supported by the fact that parents in the present study rated hand
writing as the most dysfunctional motor domain. Handwriting is a particularly
complex skill which demands not only fine motor competence but also age-
appropriate achievement (reading, spelling, language), attention, and sus
tained effort.
Parent rating of handwriting was the single variable to show a significant
association with ADHD severity, indicating poorer handwriting in the pres
ence of more severe ADHD symptomatology. Continuing interference from
ADHD symptoms might well impede the development of motor skills through
a relative lack of practice. Consistent with this, age in the present study was
inversely associated with motor competency on the Fine Motor Composite
(BOTMP).
A second source of discrepancy (between parent reports of coordination
and the results of standardised measures) might be explained by performance
variables in controlled versus uncontrolled environments. Standardised assess
ment contexts are extremely structured: measures are paced by the examiner
and consist of brief, achievable tasks conducive to the maintenance of atten
tion and effort by children with ADHD. Accordingly, the present outcome
may indicate that children with ADHD do not suffer inherent motor impair
ments, even though they are believed to do so by their parents and may in
fact display apparent difficulties in non-structured settings. Real delays in
complex motor skills such as handwriting may eventually emerge in associa
tion with lack of practice over time.
Medication effects on motor performance were examined in two ways. The
first analysis of children usually-medicated versus those not usually-medicated
failed to find any difference in motor performance for any of the variables
measured. Post facto analysis showed that motor performance in usually-
Doyle Wallen and Whitmont
ACKNOWLEDGMENT:
The authors are grateful to Dr Karen Bythe for her invaluable assistance with
the statistical analysis for this study.
REFERENCES
Achenbach TM, Edelbrock C (1983). Manual for the Child Behavior Checklist and Revised Child
Behavior Profüe. Burlington: University of Vermont, Department of Psychiatry.
Achenbach TM, Edelbrock C (1986). Manual for the Teacher Report Form and Child Behavior
Profile. Burlington: University of Vermont, Department of Psychiatry.
American Psychiatric Association (1987). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
(3rd edn Revised). Washington, DC: Author.
American Psychiatric Association (1994). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
(4th edn). Washington, DC: Author.
Barkley RA (1990). Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: A Handbook for Diagnosis and Treat-
ment. New York: The Guilford Press.
Berry CA, Shaywitz SE, Shaywitz BA (1985). Girls with Attention Deficit Disorder: A silent
minority: A report and behavioral characteristics. Pediatrics 76 (5): 801-9.
Broadhead GD, Bruininks RH (1983). Factor structure consistency in the Bruininks-Oseretsky
Test - Short Form. Rehabilitation Literature 44 (1-2): 13-18.
Bruininks R (1978). Bruminks-Oseretsicy Test of Motor Proficiency. Minnesota: American Guid
ance Service.
Cantwell DP, Baker L (1991). Association between Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
and Learning Disorders. Journal of Learning Disabilities 24 (2): 88-95.
Chawla PL, Sahasi G, Sundaram KR, Mehta M (1982). A study of prevalence and pattern of
hyperactive syndrome in primary school children. Indian Journal of Psychiatry 23 (4):
313-23.
Clark F, Mailloux Z, Parham D (1989). Sensory integration and children with learning disabili
ties. In PN Pratt, AS Allen (Eds) Occupational Therapy for Children, 2nd edn, pp. 457-509.
St Louis: The CV Mosby Co.
Gadow KD (1983). Effects of stimulant drugs on academic performance in hyperactive and
learning disabled children. Journal of Learning Disabilities 16 (5): 290-99.
Gordon NG, Kantor DR (1979). Effects of clinical dosage levels of Methylphenidate on two
flash thresholds and perceptual motor performance in hyperactive children. Perceptual and
Motor SidUs 48: 721-22.
Goyette CH, Conners CK, Ulrich RF (1978). Normative data on revised Conners Parent and
Teacher Rating Scales. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology 6: 221-36.
Gaultieri CT, Evans RW (1988). Motor performance in hyperactive children treated with
Imipramine. Perceptual and Motor Sh&s 66: 763-69.
Hartsough CS, Lambert NM (1985). Medical factors in hyperactive and normal children: Pre
natal, developmental and health history findings. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 55:
190-210.
Doyle Wallen and Whitmont
Henderson SE, Sugden DA (1992). Movement Assessment Battery for Children: Manual. San
Diego: Psychological Corporation, Harcourt Brace.
Hesterly SO (1986). Clinical management of children with hyperactivity. A shift in diagnostic
and therapeutic emphasis. Postgraduate Mediane 79 (5): 299-305.
Jastak S, Wilkinson GS (1984). Wide Range Achievement Test - Reused. Wilmington, DE Jastak
Associates.
Knights RM, Hinton GG (1969). The effects of Methylphenidate (Ritalin) on the motor skills
and behavior of children with learning problems. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease 148
(6): 643-53.
Lerer RJ, Lerer MP (1976). The effects of Methylphenidate on the soft neurological signs of
hyperactive children. Peaatrics 57 (4): 521-25.
Lerer RJ, Lerer MP, Artner J (1977). The effects of Methylphenidate on the handwriting of
children with minimal brain dysfunction. The Journal of Peaatrics 99 (1): 127-33.
McMahon SA, Greenberg LM (1977). Serial neurologic examination of hyperactive children.
Pediatrics 59: 584-87.
Moore JB, Reeve TG, Boan T (1986). Reliability of the Short Form of the Bruininks-Oseretsky
Test of Motor Proficiency with five-year-old children. Perceptual and Motor Skills 62:
223-26.
Mutti M, Sterling HM, Spalding NV (1978). Quick Neurological Screening Test (QNST).
California: Academic Therapy Publications.
Serfontein GL (1991). An approach to Attention Deficit Disorder. Modern Medicine of Aus
tralia, Oct., 103-114.
Stewart MA, Pitts FM, Craig AG, Dieruf W (1966). The hyperactive child syndrome. American
Journal of Orthopsychiatry 36: 861-67.
Szatmari P, Offord DR, Boyle MH (1989). Correlates, associated impairments, and patterns of
service utilization of children with attention deficit disorders: Findings from the Ontario
child health study. Journal of Child Psychohgy and Psychiatry 30: 205-17.
Thorndike RL, Hagen EP, Sattler JM (1986). Technical manual for the Stanford Binet Intelligence
Scale : (4th edn). Chicago: Riverside.
Verderber JMS, Payne VG (1987). A comparison of the Long and Short Forms of the Bru
ininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly 4, 51-59.
Wechsler D ( 1974). The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children—Revised. New York: Psychologi
cal Corporation.
Wechsler D ( 1991 ). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children - 3rd edn. San Antonio: The Psycho
logical Corporation. Australian Adaptation: Harcourt Brace Jovanovitch (Sydney).
Whitmont S, Clark C (in press). Kinaesthetic acuity and fine motor skills in children with
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. Manuscript submitted for publication to Devel
opmental Medicine and Child Neurology.