| Literature DB >> 36011834 |
Bin Li1,2, Ruijie Li1, Haiquan Qin1, Tao Chen1, Jingyu Sun1.
Abstract
Children's motor skills can be fully developed only by the appropriate stimulation of physical activities and the environment, and the poor development of motor skills greatly increases the risk of cognitive impairment, obesity, and movement coordination disorder. This study aimed to examine the effects of Chinese martial arts on the motor skills of preschool children aged 5-6 years through a randomized controlled trial. A total of 87 children aged 5-6 years served as participants in a martial arts sensory teaching group (MAST, n = 29), a martial arts traditional teaching group (MATT, n = 29), and a free activity group (FA, n = 29). The interventions were conducted twice weekly for a total of 10 weeks, with each session lasting 30 min. Children's motor skills were assessed before and after the intervention using the Movement Assessment Battery for Children (MABC-2). The results indicated that the balance index scores in the MAST (p < 0.001) and MATT (p = 0.014) groups were significantly higher than those in the FA and that the MAST score was significantly higher than the MATT (p = 0.004). Meanwhile, the MAST was significantly higher in total scores on motor skills when compared to the FA (p = 0.039), and the MAST showed significantly higher scores on manual dexterity when compared to both the MATT (p = 0.021) and FA (p = 0.011). Chinese martial arts can significantly improve the balance ability of preschool children, and the MAST method was found to be better than that of the MATT. Meanwhile, the MAST had good potential for the development of preschool children's manual dexterity and their overall level of motor skills.Entities:
Keywords: Chinese martial arts; martial arts sensory teaching; martial arts traditional teaching; motor skills; preschool children
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36011834 PMCID: PMC9408615 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191610204
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Participant information.
| MAST ( | MATT ( | FA ( |
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Height (cm) | 113.6 ± 5.3 | 116.8 ± 4.9 | 114.4 ± 6.1 | 2.76 | 0.069 |
| Weight (kg) | 20.9 ± 4.5 | 21.2 ± 2.8 | 21.7 ± 3.4 | 0.4 | 0.67 |
| Age (year) | 5.6 ± 0.2 | 5.4 ± 0.3 | 5.5 ± 0.3 | 1.33 | 0.27 |
| BMI | 16.1 ± 2.8 | 15.5 ± 1.4 | 16.5 ± 1.7 | 1.96 | 0.15 |
Comparison of the intervention processes (experimental groups and control group).
| MAST | MATT | FA |
|---|---|---|
|
Learning situation analysis: analysis of learners, teaching objectives, teaching conditions, and teaching content Structured martial arts content: reorganize the order of teaching content; present content reasonably; make content interesting and simple Learning environment preparation: arrange novel and exciting activity spaces; set up vivid sports venues; create a warm learning atmosphere Activity organization: stimulate learning motivation; construct teaching situation; game-based teaching activities to provide effective help Interactive experience: multi-dimensional interaction; multi-modal body perception Evaluation |
Learning situation analysis: analysis of teaching conditions and teaching content Orderly teaching: according to the movement structure of martial arts routines, teaching in sequence from front to back Combination of teaching new and consolidation: review before class, improve and consolidate the learned content, and learn new content after the review Group exercises: after the new content is basically mastered, use group exercises to strengthen motor skill Evaluation |
Learning situation analysis: analyze teaching conditions Teacher supervision: participate in outdoor activities independently under the supervision of the teacher. The teacher is mainly responsible for the safety of children and does not guide activities |
Movement ability results for all groups (mean ± sd).
| Outcome Variables | MAST ( | MATT ( | FA ( |
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group | Time | G × T | |||||
| Manual dexterity | Pre | 31.69 ± 5.83 | 29.14 ± 4.71 | 29.28 ± 6.53 | 0.004 | 0.003 | 0.224 |
| Post | 34.76 ± 2.90 | 30.62 ± 5.07 | 29.93 ± 6.02 | ||||
| Aiming and catching | Pre | 16.86 ± 5.44 | 15.79 ± 4.18 | 18.41 ± 5.52 | 0.054 | 0.024 | 0.931 |
| Post | 18.28 ± 5.84 | 16.97 ± 4.70 | 20.14 ± 6.28 | ||||
| Balance | Pre | 28.79 ± 5.70 | 28.28 ± 5.55 | 27.45 ± 5.99 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| Post | 37.59 ± 4.44 | 32.69 ± 6.38 | 28.38 ± 5.98 | ||||
| Total score | Pre | 76.34 ± 11.86 | 75.21 ± 8.72 | 74.14 ± 11.83 | 0.04 | 0.001 | 0.102 |
| Post | 85.62 ± 8.73 | 81.28 ± 10.29 | 76.45 ± 11.04 | ||||
Figure 1Pre- and post-test scores and standard errors for the motor ability test in all three study groups. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.
Sensory integration results for all groups (mean ± sd).
| MAST ( | MATT ( | FA ( |
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group | Time | G × T | |||||
| Vestibular function | Pre | 52.86 ± 9.08 | 57.07 ± 9.96 | 60.69 ± 8.33 | 0.125 | 0.004 | <0.001 |
| Post | 59.69 ± 6.17 | 57.62 ± 7.37 | 59.62 ± 7.24 | ||||
| Tactile function | Pre | 89.21 ± 11.89 | 91.48 ± 11.32 | 96.28 ± 7.79 | 0.42 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| Post | 98.69 ± 6.86 | 98.69 ± 6.68 | 96.17 ± 8.65 | ||||
| Proprioception | Pre | 51.07 ± 7.23 | 55.41 ± 6.00 | 57.62 ± 3.22 | 0.04 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| Post | 57.83 ± 4.03 | 57.00 ± 4.36 | 57.21 ± 4.59 | ||||