대한감각통합치료학회지제 14 권제 1 호 The Journal Korean Academy of Sensory Integration 2016 Vol. 14, No. 1 http://dx.doi.org/10.18064/jkasi.2016.14.1.031 Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency-2(BOT-2) 단축형을사용한학령전기아동의운동능력에대한연구 홍기훈, 김도연, 강혜빈, 박태영, 윤은정, 이지영, 정혜림 가야대학교작업치료학과 국문초록 목적 : 우리나라학령전기아동을대상으로운동적합성검사 (Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency-2: BOT-2) 단축형을사용하여학령전기아동의운동능력을제시하고, BOT-2 의표준화를위한선행연구로서기초자료를제공하고자한다. 연구방법 : 부산과김해의만 4세 6 세 81명의아동을대상으로 BOT-2 단축형을사용하여대상자의운동능력을평가하였다. 기술통계분석을사용하여운동능력의평균값, 표준편차를제시하였고, 성별과나이에따른운동능력의차이는독립 t 검정과분산분석을사용하였다. 결과 : 만 4세와 5세간원점수총점에서유의한차이를보였고 (p =.000), 만 5세와 6세간의미세운동정확성항목에서유의한차이가있었다 (p =.014). 미세운동정확성, 미세운동통합, 균형항목에서여자의평균이높았다 (p =.022, p =.006, p =.031). BOT-2 개발대상아동에비해 4세와 5세아동은높은원점수평균을나타내었고 (p =.007, p =.000), 전연령에서높은표준점수를보였다. 결론 : 본연구는전학령기아동의운동능력에대한각항목의평균을제시하였고, 나이와성별에따른운동능력의차이를발견하였다. 학령전기아동으로연령이제한되어일반화의한계가있으나 BOT-2 단축형학령전기아동규준데이터를제공하는점에서의의가있다. 주제어 : 운동능력, 운동실행, 운동적합성검사, 학령전기아동, BOT-2 Ⅰ. 서론 구두적지시의수행, 모방, 도구의사용을위해행동이나움직임을계획하고수행하는능력인실행 (Dewey, Cantell, & Crawford, 2007; Mostofsky, Dubey, Jerath, Jansiewicz, Goldberg, & Denckla, 2006) 은운동능력을기초로한다. 실행은주변의물리적환경을효과적으로다룰수있게하는뇌와행동의연결과정으 로 (Ayres, 1985), 자전거타기, 축구하기, 타인의행동을관찰하는등아동의학습과복잡한운동기술을세련되게하는기회를제공한다 (Bhat, Landa, & Galloway, 2011; Jansiewicz, Goldberg, Newschaffer, Denckla, Landa, & Mostofsky, 2006; Lloyd, MacDonald, & Lord, 2013; Pan, Tsai, & Chu, 2009; Provost, Heimerl, & Lopez, 2007). 운동실행에어려움이있는아동은목표지향적인행동을수행하고 (Fredericks & 교신저자 : 정혜림 (hyerimhome@hanmail.net) 접수일 : 2016.08.03. 심사일 : (1 차 : 2016.08.06. / 2 차 : 2016.08.13.) 게재확정일 : 2016.08.29. Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency-2(BOT-2) 단축형을사용한학령전기아동의운동능력에대한연구 31
Saladin, 1996), 움직임을창조하거나새로운움직임을사용하여적절하게조직화하고계획하는데심리- 신경학적문제를가진다 (Roley, Blanche, & Schaaf, 2001). 이러한아동은자세변화와자세모방및움직임의순서화, 타이밍, 방향성에어려움을겪으며, 일상의기본적인활동에도문제를갖는다 (Bang, Kim, Kim, Baek, Oh, & Jung, 2008). 운동실행은만 3 5세사이에급격한발달이이루어지는데 (Park & Park, 2010) 이시기의운동발달지연은후기발달을방해한다. 아동기에는자전거타기, 수영, 줄넘기등대근육운동수행을선호하고 (Cratty, 1986) 이것은발달을위해반드시필요하다. 하지만, 주거환경변화교통의발달로신체운동의공간과기회가줄어들고있다. 뿐만아니라매체와컴퓨터의발달, 인지위주의학습, 부모들의안전에대한우려, 실외놀이의중요성의과소평가로실외신체활동의기회가감소하고있다 (Lee & Choi, 2016). 아동의신체운동은성장의원동력으로발달에중요한영향을미칠뿐만아니라안전한생활의기초가된다 (Kang, 2002). 따라서이시기의신체움직임과운동실행은결코소홀히다루어져서는안된다. 아동의조기평가와중재는신체적, 사회적, 학습적, 감정적으로부정적영향을최소화한다 (Dewey & Wilson, 2001; Gillberg, 2003). 조기평가에따른조기치료는후기아동기에시작하는것보다비용절감과이차적인발달지연의방지에도움이된다 (Berk & DeGangi, 1979; McIntosh, Gibney, Quinn, & Kundert, 2000). 아동의발달과작업수행을다루는작업치료영역에서임상관찰 (clinical observation) 과 Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency(BOTMP), Motor Assessment Battery for Children(MABC), 감각통합실행검사 (Sensory Integration and Praxis Tests: SIPT) 등을통하여운동실행의평가가이루어진다 (Son et al., 2013). 하지만위의평가도구는아직국내표준화연구가이루어지지않았고, 감각통합실행검사만기초연구가이루어진실정이다 (Son et al., 2013). BOTMP 는한국작업치료사들이아동의운동적합성검사시가장많이사용하고있으며 (35.8%), 감각통합영역에서실행평가시두번째로높은비율 (19.4%) 로사용하고있음에도불구하고 (Hong & Kim, 2013; Yoo, Jung, Park, & Choi, 2006), 아직국내에서표준화되지않았 다. 외국에서개발된평가도구를표준화하지않고사용할경우언어와문화적으로부적합한평가내용으로인한문제와표준화된점수를대상아동의평가결과비교에사용할수없는한계를가진다 (Custer, Hoijtink, & Net, 2000). 특히실행기능은시지각이나 (Kim, Kwon, Park, Lee, & Kim, 2006) 운동협응 (Han & Kim, 2014) 과같이인종이나문화, 교육과같은환경적요소에의해큰영향을받는요소를포함하므로표준화연구는반드시필요하다. 이에본연구는 BOT-2 단축형을이용하여경남지역과부산에거주하는만 4세에서만 6세의학령전기아동을대상으로운동실행과관련된평가항목을평가하여 BOT-2 의표준화를위한선행연구로서기초자료를제공하고자한다. Ⅱ. 연구방법 1. 연구대상 본연구의대상자는부산과김해지역의만 4세 36명, 만 5세 27명, 만 6세 18명총 81명의아동이다. 시각과청각기능이정상범주에속하고손과팔부위에질병이나손상이없으며본연구에필요한지시를제대로이해하고수행할수있는아동으로선정하였다. 유치원에서반별로모집된전체인원중배제기준에의하여배제한인원은없었다. 평가기간은 2015 년 6월 30일부터 7월 10일까지였다. 2. 연구도구 1) Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency-2 (BOT-2) 아동의운동능력을측정하기위해 Bruininks- Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency-2(BOT-2) 단축형을사용하였다. BOT-2 는 4세에서 21세까지다양한운동기술숙련도와운동조절및운동협응에문제를가진개인의운동기술손상정도를평가하기위해 1978년 Bruininks 가개발한 Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency(BOTMP) 을바탕으로개발되었다. 32 대한감각통합치료학회지 Vol. 14, No. 1, 2016
BOT-2 는미세운동조절 (fine manual control), 손상지협응 (manual coordination), 신체협응 (body coordination), 근력과민첩성 (strength and agility) 의 4가지영역으로구성되었다. 이 4영역은미세운동정확성 (fine motor precision), 미세운동통합 (fine motor integration), 손기민성 (manual dexterity), 양측협응 (bilateral coordination), 균형 (balance activities), 달리기속도및기민성 (running speed and agility), 상지협응 (upper-limb coordination), 근력 (strength) 의 8개하위검사로나뉜다. 본연구에서는 8개하위검사를 14항목으로구성한단축형 BOT-2 를사용하였다. BOT-2 의내적일치도는.78~.97, 검사-재검사신뢰도는.53~.95, 검사자간신뢰도는.92 이상이다 (Bruininks & Bruininks, 2005). 3. 자료분석 본연구의결과는 SPSS version 21.0을사용하여통계처리하였다. 연구대상자들의일반적인특성을알아보기위하여빈도분석을실시하였다. 운동능력의평균을구하기위해기술통계를사용하였고, 정규성만족하여성별에따른운동능력의차이를비교하기위해독립 t- 검정을사용하였고, 연령에따른비교는일원분산분석을사용하였다. 통계적유의성을검정하기위해유의수준은 0.05로하였다. Ⅲ. 연구결과 2) 연구절차전화로부산과김해의유치원을섭외하고연구에대한설명후연구에동의한곳을방문하였다. 대상연령의아동부모에게평가와연구에대한설명후연구참여동의를얻었고, 아동의성별및연령에관한기본적정보를통하여대상아동을선정하였다. 검사환경은아동에게익숙한유치원교실에서조용하고아동용책상과의자에앉아마주보고시행하였다. 평가자는작업치료학전공자 5명으로 BOT-2 평가의신뢰도를높이기위하여평가가익숙해질때까지 BOT-2 의평가과정이담긴비디오를반복해서보고내용및방법을충분히숙지한후 3회이상의연습을실시하였고, 작업치료학과지도교수의확인을거쳤다. 평가를실시하기전평가자는아동에게평가의목적과방법에대해이해가될때까지충분히설명하였고시범을보여주었다. 아동이편안한상태에서 BOT-2 단축형의각항목들을평가수행방법에따라 1대 1로평가하였다. 1. 대상자의일반적특성 연구대상의일반적특성은 Table 1 과같다. 대상자는 만 4 세 0 개월부터만 6 세 11 개월까지이었으며, 만 4 세 아동은 36 명 (44.4%), 만 5 세아동은 27 명 (33.3%), 만 6 세아동은 18 명 (22.2%) 이었다. 성별은남자가 44 명 (54.3%), 여자가 37 명 (45.7%) 이었다. 2. BOT-2 원점수와표준점수총점의평균나이별비교 14 항목나이별원점수총점의평균비교에서는 4 세와 5 세만유의한차이가있었다 (p =.00)(Table 2). 3. 8 개하위검사원점수평균나이별비교 BOT-2 하위검사 8 개의원점수를나이별로비교한평 Table 1. Biological characteristics of participants [N = 81] Age Gender Boys(%) Girls(%) N(%) 4 22(61.1) 14(39.9) 36(44.4) 5 13(48.1) 14(51.9) 27(33.3) 6 9(50.0) 9(50.0) 18(22.2) Total 44(54.3) 37(45.7) 81(100.0) Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency-2(BOT-2) 단축형을사용한학령전기아동의운동능력에대한연구 33
Table 2. Total raw score and standard score of Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency-2 (BOT-2 Short Form) BOT-2 SF [N = 81] Age Raw score (M ± SD) p Standard score (M ± SD) p 4 37.67 ± 11.48 60.64 ± 9.34 5 52.89 ± 8.75.000 *.660 59.63 ± 9.05 6 59.89 ± 2.21 57.94 ± 7.88 M ± SD: Mean ± Standard Deviation Table 3. Age difference of raw score (8 subtest) [N = 81] Subtest (score) Age M ± SD p Fine motor precision (14) Fine motor integration (10) Manual dexterity (9) Bilateral coordination (7) Balance activities (8) Running speed and agility (10) Upper-limb coordination (12) Strength (18) *p <.05, **p <.01 M ± SD: Mean ± Standard Deviation 4 4.06 ± 2.44 5 6.93 ± 2.89 6 9.28 ± 2.42 4 5.25 ± 2.57 5 8.00 ± 1.52 6 9.22 ± 0.81 4 2.67 ± 2.24 5 4.30 ± 1.73 6 5.17 ± 1.25 4 6.03 ± 1.32 5 6.74 ± 0.53 6 6.89 ± 0.59 4 6.28 ± 1.19 5 6.88 ± 0.93 6 7.06 ± 1.06 4 7.28 ± 1.99 5 8.04 ± 0.98 6 8.56 ± 0.51 4 2.64 ± 2.67 5 5.22 ± 2.91 6 5.67 ± 2.72 4 3.72 ± 3.12 5 6.78 ± 2.71 6 8.06 ± 1.98.000 **.014 *.000 **.131.005 **.325.020 *.883.091.879.135.514.002 **.870.000 **.322.906.826 균은 Table 3 과같다. 만 4 세와 5 세평균비교에서미세 운동정확성 (p =.000), 미세운동통합 (p =.000), 손 기민성 (p =.005), 양측협응 (p =.020), 상지협응 (p =.002), 근력 (p =.000) 에서유의한차이를보였다. 만 5 세와 6 세에서는미세운동정확성 (p =.014) 에서만유의 한차이를보였다. 34 대한감각통합치료학회지 Vol. 14, No. 1, 2016
Table 4. Gender difference of raw score (8 subtest) [N = 81] Subtest (score) Gender M ± SD p Fine motor precision (14) Boys 5.41 ± 3.42 Girls 7.08 ± 2.94.022 * Fine motor integration (10) Boys 6.36 ± 2.89 Girls 7.86 ± 1.86.006 ** Manual dexterity (9) Boys 3.50 ± 2.41 Girls 4.08 ± 1.75.214 Bilateral coordination (7) Boys 6.36 ± 1.26 Girls 6.57 ± 0.69.382 Balance activities (8) Boys 6.41 ± 1.13 Girls 6.95 ± 1.05.031 * Running speed and agility (10) Boys 7.55 ± 1.92 Girls 8.14 ± 0.82.070 Upper-limb coordination (12) Boys 4.43 ± 3.17 Girls 3.86 ± 2.95.410 Strength (18) Boys 5.57 ± 3.76 Girls 5.86 ± 2.69.681 M ± SD: Mean ± Standard Deviation 4. 8 개하위검사원점수평균성별비교 BOT-2 하위검사 8개의원점수의평균을성별에따라비교하면미세운동정확성 (p =.022), 미세운동통합 (p =.006), 양측협응 (p =.031) 에서남녀간유의한차이를보였고, 3개항목모두여자가높은점수를나타내었다 (Table 4). 5. 14 항목원점수나이별, 남녀평균 전체 14항목원점수의나이별, 남녀평균은 Table 5에제시하였다. Ⅳ. 고찰 BOT-2 는운동기능을평가하기위해고안된검사도구로작업치료분야에서운동실행능력의평가를위해빈번히사용하지만국내표준화되지않아한국아동에게 그결과를적용하기에제한적이다. 따라서본연구는표준화를위한예비연구로서기초자료를제공하고자학령전기아동을대상으로 BOT-2 를실시하고나이별평균을제시하고나이와성별간운동능력의차이를알아보았다. 본연구의결과 BOT-2 단축형원점수총점의평균에서는만 4세와만 5세간유의한차이를보였고 (p <.05), 만 5세와만 6세는평균점수의차이는있으나통계학적으로유의하지않았다. Chang 과 Hwang(2004) 이정상아동 90명을대상으로운동감각점수를비교한연구에서도만 4세와만 5세, 만 4세와만 6세에서유의한차이가나타났고 (p <.05), 만 5세와만 6세에서는평균점수의차이는있으나통계학적으로유의하지않았다고보고하였다. 8개하위검사의원점수평균은미세운동정확성에서만 5세와만 6세간에유의한차이가있었다. 아동에서성인, 노인에이르기까지연령에따라작업과제가달라지므로손의기능과움직임의형태는다르게나타나고 (Lee, 2002), 손의파악 (prehension) 과강도 (strength) 의형태는나이가들어감에따라변화한다 (Shiffmanm, 1992). Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency-2(BOT-2) 단축형을사용한학령전기아동의운동능력에대한연구 35
Table 5. Raw scores for 14 items [N = 81] Subtest Items Gender 4 years 5 years 6 years Fine motor precision (14) Fine motor integration (10) Manual dexterity (9) Bilateral coordination (7) Balance activities (8) Running speed and agility (10) Upper-limb coordination (12) Strength (18) M ± SD: Mean ± Standard Deviation Drawing lines in crooked path Folding paper Copying a square Copying a star Transferring pennies Jumping in place Tapping feet and finger Walking forward a line Standing on one leg One-legged stationary hop Dropping and catching ball Dribbling a ball push-ups Sit-ups Boys 2.32 ± 1.25 3.85 ± 1.68 4.89 ± 1.36 Girls 2.93 ± 1.07 4.36 ± 1.39 5.56 ± 2.01 Boys 1.18 ± 1.62 2.69 ± 2.02 3.56 ± 2.13 Girls 2.00 ± 1.41 2.93 ± 1.77 4.56 ± 1.33 Boys 3.09 ± 1.69 4.15 ± 0.69 4.56 ± 0.53 Girls 3.93 ± 1.00 4.21 ± 0.80 4.78 ± 0.44 Boys 1.36 ± 1.26 3.54 ± 1.33 4.56 ± 0.73 Girls 2.57 ± 1.55 4.07 ± 0.73 4.56 ± 0.53 Boys 2.46 ± 2.48 4.23 ± 2.17 5.00 ± 1.22 Girls 3.00 ± 1.84 4.36 ± 1.28 5.33 ± 1.32 Boys 2.68 ± 0.78 3.00 ± 0.00 3.11 ± 0.33 Girls 2.71 ± 0.73 2.86 ± 0.53 2.89 ± 0.33 Boys 3.23 ± 1.02 3.62 ± 0.50 4.00 ± 0.00 Girls 3.50 ± 0.52 4.00 ± 0.00 3.78 ± 0.43 Boys 3.91 ± 0.43 3.77 ± 0.44 3.89 ± 0.33 Girls 3.79 ± 0.43 3.93 ± 0.27 4.00 ± 0.00 Boys 2.18 ± 0.96 2.92 ± 0.76 2.89 ± 1.05 Girls 2.70 ± 1.05 3.14 ± 0.95 3.33 ± 0.87 Boys 6.64 ± 2.30 8.30 ± 0.85 8.67 ± 0.50 Girls 8.29 ± 0.61 7.79 ± 1.05 8.44 ± 0.53 Boys 1.67 ± 2.01 3.77 ± 1.64 4.22 ± 1.30 girls 1.86 ± 1.75 3.07 ± 2.06 3.33 ± 2.18 Boys 0.68 ± 0.89 2.31 ± 1.03 2.44 ± 1.42 Girls 0.93 ± 1.07 1.36 ± 1.39 1.33 ± 0.87 Boys 2.05 ± 2.21 4.54 ± 1.94 5.33 ± 1.32 Girls 2.43 ± 2.28 3.64 ± 1.65 4.56 ± 1.33 Boys 1.14 ± 1.42 2.77 ± 1.88 3.56 ± 0.88 Girls 2.14 ± 1.35 2.64 ± 1.01 2.67 ± 0.87 전형적으로, 학령전기아동의잡기와쥐는힘은이전연령보다발달하고, 3 4 세와 4 5 세사이의아동들이손바닥잡기, 측면잡기, 3점으로잡는힘에있어서의미있는증가를보인다 (Lee-Valkov, Aaron, Eladoumikdachi, Thornby, & Netscher, 2003). 6세는학령기를준비하는연령으로글씨쓰기등미세한손의움직임에대한요구의증가에따라미세손기능이확연히발달한다 (Lee, 2002). 8개하위검사의성별평균의차이는미세운동정확성 과미세운동통합, 균형활동에서유의하였는데 (p <.05) 여자가모두남자보다 3항목에서높은점수를나타내었다. 미세동작은협응과통합이잘이루어져야하는능력으로나이나성별에의해영향을받을수있다 (Charlane, Anne, & Linda, 1997). 남자는구조화와같은공간적과제를잘수행하는반면, 여자는섬세한운동제어과제를더잘수행한다. 그림을그리거나모양을따라선을그리는눈-손협응력과제는공간적능력과함께보다섬세한운동제어와손가락기능을요구하므로관련항 36 대한감각통합치료학회지 Vol. 14, No. 1, 2016
목에서여자가더높은점수를받을수있다 (Kimura, 1992). 운동속도와섬세한시각적인운동의협응성을요구하는 Pegboard 검사에도성별의차가나타났으며 (Ruff & Parker, 1993), 비우세손과우세손모두에서여자는남자보다뛰어남을보였다 (Pearson & Fergelson, 1989). 4세와 5세의원점수총점평균은각각 37.67, 52.89 점으로 BOT-2 개발대상아동에비해유의하게높은점수를나타내었고 (p =.007, p =.000), 우리나라아동의표준점수는 4세가 60.64 점, 5세가 59.63 점, 6세가 57.94 점으로나타나, 개발대상아동의 50% 에해당하는표준점수 50점보다높은평균을보였다. 벨기에의 6세아동과표준점수를비교하였을때우리나라아동이 57.94 로벨기에아동의평균 50.6 보다유의하게높았다 (p =.000)(Job, Eva, Jan, Roel, Renaat, & Matthieu, 2014). 인도산탈족의 5 6세아동과비교하였을때우리나라아동의원점수총점의평균이높았다 (p =.000) (Chowdhury, Wrotniak, & Ghosh, 2010). 이는영아기이후에인종이나문화와같은환경적요소에의해큰영향을받아운동협응이각기다른양상으로변화하는개체발생적행동 (ontogenetic behavior) 을보이는것 (Han & Kim 2014) 과일상생활에서젓가락과같은세밀한동작을하는민족과도구를사용하지않는민족이나포크와나이프를사용하는민족의식습관에대한손의기능도차이가나는것을예상할수있다 (Lee, 2002). 따라서평가도구의규준을개발할때의대상자와다른인종이나교육과문화에영향을받은아동을평가할때에는해석에주의가요구된다 (Simons, Daly, Theodorou, Caron, Simons, & Andoniadou, 2008; Yu, Kim, & Kim, 2006). 본연구에몇가지제한점이있었다. 첫째, 본연구에서는대상아동들이부산과김해지역에거주하고, 만4 6세까지의아동 81명으로만국한되어있다. 또한임의추출로연구대상자를선정하여연구결과를모든지역의학령전기정상아동에게적용하고결과를일반화시키기에어려움이있다. 둘째, 인지능력과발달상의요소들이결과에다른영향을미쳤을것으로예상되나연구대상자의동질성을확인하지못하였다. 차후연구에서는더많은일반아동과우리나라전지역을대상으로분석하고표준화하는연구가필요할것이다. Ⅳ. 결론 본연구는학령전기아동을대상으로 BOT-2 의표준화를위한연구의기초자료를제공하고자하였다. 만 4 세와 5세간의원점수총점, 만 5세와 6세간의미세운동정확성항목에서차이가나타났다. 여자가남자보다미세운동정확성, 미세운동통합, 균형항목에서유의하게높은점수를나타내었다. BOT-2 개발대상아동에비해 4세와 5세아동은높은원점수평균을나타내었고 (p =.007, p =.000), 전연령에서높은표준점수를보였다. 연구의결과는대상자의연령과지역이제한되어일반화하기어려운점이있으나본평가도구를사용하는임상가및연구자에게 BOT-2 에대한기초자료를제공하였다는데의의가있다. 또한추후 BOT-2 를이용한연구에서연구대상을보다확장하여표준화하는연구가필요하다. 참고문헌 Ayres, A. J. (1985). Developmental dyspraxia and adult-onset apraxia. Torrance, CA: Sensory Integration International. Bang, Y. S., Kim, J. M., Kim, M. J., Baek, H. H., Oh, M. H., & Jung, H. A. (2008). Pediatric occupational therapy (2nd ed.). Seoul, Korea: EPublic. Berk, R. A., & DeGangi, C. A. (1979). Technical consideration in the evaluation of pediatric motor scales. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 33(4), 240-244. Bhat, A. N, Landa. R. J., & Galloway, J. C. (2011) Current perspectives on motor functioning in infants, children, and adults with autism spectrum disorders. Physical Therapy, 91(7), 1116-1129. Bruininks, R. H., & Bruininks, B. D. (2005). Bruininks Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency (2nd ed.). Minneapolis, MN: Pearson Assessment. Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency-2(BOT-2) 단축형을사용한학령전기아동의운동능력에대한연구 37
Chang, M. Y., & Hwang, K. C. (2004). Comparison of kinesthesia test of SIPT for preschool children. Journal of Korean Academy of Sensory Integration, 2(1), 1-9. Charlane, P., Anne, H., & Linda, T. D., (1997). In-hand manipulation in young children: Translation movements. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 51(9), 719-728. Chowdhury, S. D., Wrotniak, B. H., & Ghosh, T. (2010). Nutritional and socioeconomic factors in motor development of Santal children of the Purulia district, India. Early Human Development, 86(12), 79-84. Cratty, B. J. (1986). Perceptual and motor development in infants and children (3rd ed.). Dnglewood Cliffs NJ: prentice-hall. Custer, J. W. H., Hoijtink, H., & Net, J. (2000). Cultural differences in functional status measurement: Analyses of person fit according to the Rasch model. Quality of Life Research, 9(5), 571-578. Dewey, D., Cantell, M., & Crawford, S. G. (2007). Motor and gestural performance in children with autism spectrum disorders, developmental coordination disorder, and/or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 13(2), 246 256. Dewey. D., & Wilson, B. N. (2001). Developmental coordination disorder: What is it? Physical and Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics, 20(2-3) 5-7. Fredericks, C. M., & Saladin, L. K. (1996). Pathophysiology of motor systems: Principles and clinical presentations. Philadelphia, PA: F.A. Davis. Gillberg, C. (2003). Deficits in attention, motor control, and perception: A brief review. Archives of Disease in Childhood, 88(10), 904-910. Halpern, D. F. (1986). Sex differences in cognitive abilities. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. Han, D., & Kim, M. (2014). Review of motor development assessment tools and application. Journal of the Korean Association of Certified Exercise Professionals, 16(3), 1-14. Hong, E., & Kim, K. (2013). Systematic review of assessment tools for praxis ability of sensory integrative function: Provide range of assessment tools in foreign and domestic normal children. Journal of Korean Academy of Sensory Integration, 11(2), 41-56. Jansiewicz, E. M., Goldberg, M. C., Newschaffer, C. J., Denckla, M. B., Landa, R., & Mostofsky, S. H. (2006), Motor signs distinguish children with high functioning autism and asperger s syndrome from controls. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 36(5), 613 621. Job, F., Eva, D., Jan, B., Roel, V., Renaat, M. P., & Matthieu, L. (2014). Motor competence assessment in children: Convergent and discriminant validity between the BOT-2 Short Form and KTK testing batteries. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 35(6), 1375-1383. Kang, B. (2002). A study of young children s grossmotor and fine-motor skill development. Master's thesis, Jung-ang university, Seoul. Kim, D., Kwon, K., Park, Y., Lee, S., & Kim, K. (2006). The relationship with motor praxis and visual perception of elementary school student. Journal of Korean Society of Occupational Therapy, 14(2), 69-79. Kimura, D. (1992). Sex differences in the brain. Scientific American, 267(3), 118-125. Lee, H., & Choi, I. (2016). The effects of outdoor physical activities for the promotion of basic physical fitness on young children s happiness and ego-resilience. Journal of Education & Culture, 22(1), 203-226. Lee, S. (2002). A review of hand function. Journal of Korean Academy of Physical Therapist, 9(4), 115-168. 38 대한감각통합치료학회지 Vol. 14, No. 1, 2016
Lee-Valkov, P. M., Aaron D. H., Eladoumikdachi, F., Thornby, J., & Netscher, D. T. (2003). Measuring normal hand dexterity values in normal 3-, 4-, and 5-year-old children and their relationship with grip and pinch strength. Journal of Hand Therapy, 16(1), 22-28. Lloyd, M., MacDonald, M., & Lord, C. (2013). The motor skills of toddlers with autism spectrum disorders. Autism, 17(2), 133-146. McIntosh, D., Gibney, L., Quinn, K., & Kundert, D. (2000). Concurrent validity of the early screening profiles and the differential ability scales with an at-risk preschool sample. Psychology in the Schools, 37(3), 201-207. Mostofsky, S. H., Dubey, P., Jerath, V. K., Jansiewicz, E. M., Goldberg, M. C., & Denckla, M. B. (2006). Developmental dyspraxia is not limited to imitation in children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 12(3), 314-326. Pan, C. Y., Tsai, C. L., & Chu, C. H. (2009). Fundamental movement skills in children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 39(12), 1694-1705. Park, S. R., & Park, H. J. (2010). An analysis of the cognitive process of 5-year-old children: A focus on a performance of cognitive assessment system based on gender, monthly age, and tendencies towards hyperactivity. Child Studies in Diverse Contexts, 31(4), 139-157. Pearson, J. L., & Ferguson, L. R. (1989). Gender differences in patterns of spatial ability environmental cognition and math and English achievement in late adolescence. Adolescence, 24(94), 421-431. Provost, B., Heimerl, S., & Lopez, B. R. (2007). Levels of gross and fine motor development in young children with autism spectrum disorder. Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics, 27(3), 21-36. Roley, S. S., Blanche, E. I., & Schaaf, R. C. (2001). Understanding the nature of sensory integration with diverse populations. San Antonio, TX: Therapy Skill Builders. Ruff, R.. M., & Parker, S. B. (1993). Gender and age - specific changes in motor speed and eye hand coordination in adults: Normative values for the finger tapping and grooved pegboard tests. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 76(3), 1219-1230. Shiffman, L. M. (1992). Effects of aging on adult hand function, American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 46(9), 785-792. Simons, J., Daly, D., Theodorou, F., Caron, C., Simons, J., & Andoniadou, E. (2008). Validity and reliability of the TGMD-2 in 7-10year-old Flemish children with intellectual disability. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 25(1), 71-82. Son, M., Kim, H., Maeng, H., Park, M., Son. C, Jo, S., et al. (2013) The preliminary study on praxis in preschoolers in Korea. Journal of Korean Society of Occupational Therapy, 21(4), 37-46. Yoo, E. Y., Jung, M. Y., Park, S. Y., & Choi, E. H. (2006) Current trends of occupational therapy assessment tool by Korean occupational therapist. Journal of Korean Society of Occupational Therapy, 14(3), 27-37. Yu, S. B., Kim, J. J., & Kim, K. M. (2006). The correlation between handwriting skills and praxis in the low grades students at an elementary school. Journal of Korean Academy of Sensory Integration, 4(1), 1-15. Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency-2(BOT-2) 단축형을사용한학령전기아동의운동능력에대한연구 39
Abstract A Preliminary Study on Motor Ability of Preschool Aged Children by Using Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency-2 (BOT-2) Short Form Hong, Ki-hoon, M.Sc, O.T., Kim, Do-yeon, Kang, Hye-bin, Park, Tae-yeong, Yun, Eun-jeong, Lee, Ji-yeong, Jung, Hye-rim, Ph.D., O.T. Dept. of Occupational Therapy, Kaya University Objective : This study aimed to provide the preliminary data as a pilot study on standardizing BOT-2 by using an assessment criteria linked to Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency (BOTMP) short form for the children with preschool years(4-6 year old) in South Korea. Methods : A total of 81 children aged 4-6 in Busan and Gimhae were participated in this study. They were evaluated by using BOT-2 SF. It provides the average values and standard deviations about the abilities of praxis along with descriptive statistical analyses, and has the verification of gender differences by using independent t-test and using ANOVA for discrepancies in the abilities of praxis. Results : There were significance difference in the total raw score between four and five (p=.000), the items on fine motor accuracy between five and six year olds (p=.014). Girls showed higher scores than boys in fine motor accuracy, fine motor integration and balance (p=.022, p=.006, p=.031). Also, mean raw scores of 4 and 5 year olds (p=.007, =.000), and the all age group's standard scores were higher than the age in American children who were the participants of BOT-2. Conclusion : This study suggested the average of each item with regard to the ability of motor praxis about the children of preschool ages and showed the dissimilarity in the ability of motor praxis between age and gender, also between the participants in this study and American children who were participants of BOT-2. The research could provide basic data for future studies to standardize BOT-2 SF for korean preschoolers. Key words : Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency (BOTMP), children of pre-school age, motor function, motor praxis 40 대한감각통합치료학회지 Vol. 14, No. 1, 2016