BACKGROUND: A goal of physical therapy interventions for children and youth with acquired brain injury (ABI) is the learning and relearning of motor skills. Therapists can apply theoretically derived and evidence-based motor learning strategies (MLSs) to structure the presentation of a task and organize the environment in ways that may promote effective, transfer-oriented practice. However, little is known about how MLSs are used in physical therapy interventions for children with ABI. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to develop and validate an observer-rated Motor Learning Strategy Rating Instrument (MLSRI) quantifying the application of MLSs in physical therapy interventions for children with ABI. DESIGN: A multi-stage, iterative, item generation and reduction approach was used. METHODS: An initial list of MLS items was generated through literature review. Seven experts participated in face validation to confirm item comprehensiveness. In a content validation process, 12 physical therapists with pediatric ABI experience responded to a questionnaire evaluating feasibility and importance of items. Six physical therapy sessions with clients with ABI were videotaped at a children's rehabilitation center. The 12 physical therapists participated in a session where they: (1) rated session videos to test the MLSRI and (2) provided verbal feedback. RESULTS: Revisions were made sequentially to the MLSRI based on these processes. LIMITATIONS: The MLSRI was scored during videotape observation rather than being given a live rating, which may be onerous in certain settings and may influence therapist or child behavior. CONCLUSIONS: Further reliability investigations will determine whether the 33-item MLSRI is of help in documenting strategy use during intervention, as an evaluation tool in research, and as a knowledge transfer resource in clinical practice.
BACKGROUND: A goal of physical therapy interventions for children and youth with acquired brain injury (ABI) is the learning and relearning of motor skills. Therapists can apply theoretically derived and evidence-based motor learning strategies (MLSs) to structure the presentation of a task and organize the environment in ways that may promote effective, transfer-oriented practice. However, little is known about how MLSs are used in physical therapy interventions for children with ABI. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to develop and validate an observer-rated Motor Learning Strategy Rating Instrument (MLSRI) quantifying the application of MLSs in physical therapy interventions for children with ABI. DESIGN: A multi-stage, iterative, item generation and reduction approach was used. METHODS: An initial list of MLS items was generated through literature review. Seven experts participated in face validation to confirm item comprehensiveness. In a content validation process, 12 physical therapists with pediatric ABI experience responded to a questionnaire evaluating feasibility and importance of items. Six physical therapy sessions with clients with ABI were videotaped at a children's rehabilitation center. The 12 physical therapists participated in a session where they: (1) rated session videos to test the MLSRI and (2) provided verbal feedback. RESULTS: Revisions were made sequentially to the MLSRI based on these processes. LIMITATIONS: The MLSRI was scored during videotape observation rather than being given a live rating, which may be onerous in certain settings and may influence therapist or child behavior. CONCLUSIONS: Further reliability investigations will determine whether the 33-item MLSRI is of help in documenting strategy use during intervention, as an evaluation tool in research, and as a knowledge transfer resource in clinical practice.
Authors: Ingrid P A van der Veer; Evi Verbecque; Eugene A A Rameckers; Caroline H G Bastiaenen; Katrijn Klingels Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-08-25 Impact factor: 3.752
Authors: Christiaan Gmelig Meyling; Olaf Verschuren; Ingrid R Rentinck; Raoul H H Engelbert; Jan Willem Gorter Journal: Dev Med Child Neurol Date: 2021-07-26 Impact factor: 4.864