بررسی روایی و پایایی مجموعهٔ آزمون‌های ارزیابی حرکت کودکانویرایش دوم در کودکان کم‌توان ذهنی

زمینه و هدف: نقص در عملکرد حرکتی در کودکان کم توان ذهنی رایج است. اندازه گیری عملکرد حرکتی با ویژگی های روان سنجی صحیح برای استفادهٔ بالینی و پژوهش ضرورت دارد. هدف از این تحقیق، تعیین روایی و پایایی مجموعهٔ آزمون های ارزیابی حرکت کودکان ویرایش دوم (mabc-2) برای کودکان 7تا10سالهٔ کم توان ذهنی بود.روش بررسی: روش پژوهش از نوع توصیفی همبستگی بود. بدین منظور 124 دانش آموز 7تا10سالهٔ کم توان ذهنی مشغول به تحصیل در سال تحصیلی 96-1395 به شیوهٔ نمونهٔ هدفمند دردسترس انتخاب شدند. روایی آزمون mabc-2 به شکل روایی هم زمان با آزمون bot-2 و پایایی به صورت پایایی همسانی درونی و به شیوهٔ آلفای کرونباخ به دست آمد. برای تحلیل آماری داده ها، نرم افزار spss نسخهٔ 19 به کار رفت. سطح معناداری نیز 0٫05 در نظر گرفته شد. یافته ها: مقدار آلفای کرونباخ کلی 0٫89 محاسبه شد که همبستگی قوی را نشان داد. کمترین و بیشترین مقدار همبستگی اسپیرمن بین هر ماده با نمرهٔ کل به ترتیب مربوط به تکلیف پرتاب کیسهٔ لوبیا با 0٫38 و تعادل روی تخته با پای برتر با 0٫79 بود (0٫05>p). ضریب همبستگی اسپیرمن مشخص کرد بین خرده مقیاس چالاکی دستی از آزمون mabc-2 با دو حوزهٔ حرکتی و چهار خرده مقیاس مشترک با آزمون bot-2 همبستگی مثبت و معناداری وجود دارد؛ ولی بین خرده مقیاس دریافت و پرتاب از آزمون mabc-2 با هیچ یک از خرده مقیاس های آزمون bot-2 هیچ گونه همبستگی مثبت و معناداری مشاهده نشد. همچنین خرده مقیاس تعادل از آزمون mabc-2 تنها با خرده مقیاس های سرعت و چالاکی (0٫30=r،0٫024=p) و تعادل (0٫29=r=،0٫027p) از آزمون bot-2، دارای همبستگی معناداری بود. نتیجه گیری: براساس یافته های پژوهش آزمون mabc-2 از روایی و پایایی خوبی برای کودکان کم توان ذهنی برخوردار است؛ ولی بعضی از مواد آن برای این کودکان نیاز به تعدیل دارد.

Validity and reliability of Movement Assessment Battery for Children2 Second Edition in children whit intellectual disability

Background & Objective: There is a little study on the validity and reliability of motor tests in children with intellectual disabilities. Deficit in motor performance is common in children with intellectual disabilities (ID). It is important to use standardized test for evaluating the clinical and research based performance assessment in children. The purpose of this study was to examine the reliability and concurrent validity of age band 2 of the movement assessment battery for children–second edition (MABC–2) in intellectual disability children.Methods: The present study was descriptive and correlational. A total of 124 children whit intellectual disability (58 girls and 66 boys) 7–10 years old were selected as sample. The criteria for entering the study were aged between 7 to 10; having an IQ score between 50 to 70 that were available in their medical records at the school: without serious emotional and behavioral disorders and lack of any participation in physical and therapeutic programs. For minimizing data impairment children with autism spectrum, cerebral palsy, blindness and deafness, neurological disorders such as stroke, muscular dystrophy and epilepsy were excluded from the study. For measuring concurrent validity of MABC–2 test we used from BOT–2 test. In accordance with the instruction manual, the examiner, before testing each assignment, gave the opportunity to become familiar with the way the task that was performed, this opportunity varied for different assignments. Scoring was done according to the manual. To obtain rating of intellectual disability (IQ score), students dossier were used. To evaluate concurrent validity, 55 children in two consecutive days, evaluated with two tests. In addition, for reliability we used internal consistency with Cranach’s alpha. Data were analyzed using SPSS software version 19 and significance level was 0.05.Results: The Cronbach’s alpha value was 0.89, indicating a high correlation. In addition, the lowest and highest correlation between each item with total score was related to the task of throwing beanbag with 0.38 and one–board balance with 0.79. Spearman correlation coefficient showed the positive and significant correlation between manual dexterity component of the MABC–2 test with two composite areas of fine manual control (r=0.58, p=0.001) and manual coordination (r=0.41, p=0.002) of BOT–2 test. Also positive and significant correlation between manual dexterity component of the MABC–2 test with four subscales of fine motor precision (r=0.58, p=0.000), fine motor integration (r=0.55, p=0.001), manual dexterity (r=0.42, p=0.000) and upper–limb coordination (r=0.41, p=0.002) of BOT–2 test. However, there was no correlation between the aiming and catching component of the MABC–2 test with four composite areas of fine manual control (r=0.21, p=0.441), manual coordination (r=0.198, p=0.148), body coordination (r=0.198, p=0.148), strength and agility (r=0.126, p=0.359) of BOT–2 test. There was a significant correlation between the balance component of the MABC–2 test and running speed and agility (r=0.30, p=0.024) and balance (r=0.29, p=0.027) of BOT–2 test but no significant correlation between the balance component of the MABC–2 test and bilateral coordination (r=0.03, p=0.984) and strength (r=0.024, p=0.863).Conclusion: The MABC–2 test had good validity and reliability for intellectual disability children, but some of its items need to be adjusted for these children. The high correlation between fine motor skills in two tests states that two MABC–2 and BOT–2 tests measuring better fine motor skills compare to gross and balance motor skills in children 7 to 10 years old with intellectual disability.