Search

Harmonious voluntary movements require efficiency in their planning and execution. Throughout middle childhood structural changes in the central nervous and musculoskeletal systems influence these processes and resultant motor behavior. In this study, we evaluated the characteristics of the motor planning and executing of aiming movements directed at targets located in different positions in space in children aged 7, 9, and 11 years. We divided 43 right-handed children, into three age groups and instructed them to perform aiming movements directed at targets using a stylus on a digital tablet. The children performed the movement with their dominant upper limbs from a starting point towards targets positioned ipsilaterally or contralaterally to this dominant limb. We analyzed temporal and spatial variables of motor performance. Younger (7-year-old) children made more errors in the initial movement direction and more frequently corrected their movements during task execution when compared to 9- and 11-year-old children who did not differ from each other. All age groups were similar in movement accuracy and precision. Movements toward contralateral targets were slower and more accurate than movements toward ipsilateral targets for all groups. These results show that performing aiming movements develop with the onset of middle childhood.

Background Motor coordination, the ability to produce context-dependent organized movements in spatial and temporal domains, is impaired after neurological injuries. Outcome measures assessing coordination mostly quantify endpoint performance variables (ie, temporal qualities of whole arm movement) but not movement quality (ie, trunk and arm joint displacements). Objective To develop an outcome measure to assess coordination of multiple body segments at both endpoint trajectory and movement quality levels, based on observational kinematics, in adults with neurological injuries. Methods A 3-phase study was used to develop the Comprehensive Coordination Scale (CCS): instrument development, Delphi process, and focus group meeting. The CCS was constructed from common tests used in clinical practice and research. Rating scales for different behavioral elements were developed to guide analysis. For content validation, 8 experts (ie, neurological clinicians/researchers) answered questionnaires about relevance, comprehension, and feasibility of each test and rating scale. A focus group conducted with 6 of 8 experts obtained consensus on rating scale and instruction wording, and identified gaps. Three additional experts reviewed the revised CCS content to obtain a final version. Results Experts identified a gap regarding assessment of hand/finger coordination. The CCS final version is composed of 6 complementary tests of coordination: finger-to-nose, arm-trunk, finger, lower extremity, and 2- and 4-limb interlimb coordination. Constructs include spatial and temporal variables totaling 69 points. Higher scores indicate better performance. Conclusions The CCS may be an important, understandable and feasible outcome measure to assess spatial and temporal coordination. CCS measurement properties are presented in the companion article.