Search

PurposeGross motor skills (GMS) and inhibitory control (IC) which are both development in preschool stage is significant for preschooler to healthy growth. However, the evidence of relationship between them in preschoolers are still insufficient, most of studies only focus on youth. Thus, the aim of this research is to examine the association between GMS and IC in preschool children.MethodsThis cross-sectional study used baseline data from a previous intervention study of preschoolers conducted in 2018. GMS were assessed by using the Test for Gross Motor Development (2nd edition) in preschoolers, which includes two subtests of locomotor and object control skills. Total GMS is calculated from the sum of these two subtests. The Fish Flanker task was used to evaluate both accuracy and reaction time of IC. Multivariate linear regression models were established to analyze the relationships between GMS and IC.ResultsA total of 123 preschool-age children (55 girls, 68 boys) were included in the final analysis. After adjusting for confounders, GMS (β = −8.27 ms, 95%CI: −14.2, −2.34), locomotor (β = −11.2 ms, 95%CI: −21.43, −0.97), and object control skills (β = −12.15 ms, 95%CI: −22.07, −2.23) were all negatively related with reaction time of IC.ConclusionThere was a significant negative correlation between gross motor skills and the reaction time of inhibitory control in preschool children. Further research is needed to verify this finding in prospective and experimental studies.

Background: The results of sedentary time (ST) and health-related physical fitness (HPF) are not completely consistent and the studies concentrated on pre-schoolers are very limited.Methods: We measured ST and ST patterns (ST Bouts time, ST Breaks times) by accelerometer. The health-related physical fitness T-score (HPFT) was calculated by five indexes: height-weight standard score, 20 m shuttle-run test, grip strength, standing long jump and 2 × 10 m shuttle-run test.Results: We included 375 pre-schoolers (211 boys, 164 girls) in the final analysis. The total ST and ST Bouts times negatively correlated with HPFT in pre-schoolers. HPFT reduced by 1.69 and 0.70 points per 10 min increased in total ST and ST Bouts times, respectively. HPFT of the highest quartile group reduced by 9.85 points in total ST, and 10.54 points in ST Bouts time compared with the lowest quartile group. However, the HPFT increased by 0.09 points per 10 times increased in ST Breaks times; the HPFT increased by 16.21 and 15.59 points when moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) replaced total ST and ST Bouts time.Conclusions: HPF negatively correlated with the Total ST and ST Bouts times, but positively correlated with ST Breaks times; and HPF significantly improved when MVPA replaced ST in pre-schoolers.

Background: Exercise modes can be divided into open skill exercise (OSE) and closed skill exercise (CSE). While research has shown that these two exercise modes may have different effects on cognitive function, this possibility has not been systematically reviewed. Objective: The purpose of the present review was to objectively evaluate the research literature regarding the effects of OSE versus CSE on cognitive function. Methods: Six electronic databases (Web of Science, EMBASE, Google Scholar, PubMed, PsycINFO, and SPORTDiscus) were searched from inception dates to December 2018 for studies examining the associations of OSE and CSE with cognitive function. The literature searches were conducted using the combinations of two groups of relevant search items related to exercise modes (i.e. OSE and CSE) and cognitive function. Articles were limited to human studies in all age groups. Both interventional and observational studies with full text published in English-language peer-reviewed journals were considered eligible. The search process, study selection, data extraction, and study quality assessment were carried out independently by two researchers. Results: A total of 1,573 articles were identified. Fourteen observational and five interventional studies met the inclusion criteria. Twelve of the 14 observational studies found both OSE and CSE to benefit cognitive function, and seven of these 14 observational studies supported superior effects of OSE compared with CSE for enhancing cognitive function. Three of the five interventional studies found that OSE (versus CSE) led to greater improvements in cognitive function in both children and older adults. Conclusion: Although the majority of studies in this review were observational cross-sectional designs, the review tends to support OSE as more effective for improving some aspects of cognitive function compared with CSE. More rigorous randomized control trials with long-term follow-ups are needed in order to confirm these differential cognitive effects of the two exercise modes.