Poster #22 - Effects of Creative & General Movement Interventions on Fine-motor, Gross-motor, and Functional Skills of Children with ASD.

• In Event: Poster Session 17

Abstract

Background: Recently, we reported that 87% of school-age children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) are at risk for motor impairments (Bhat, 2020; Bhat et al., 2022). In our past studies, musical or yoga-based interventions led to generalized and task-specific improvements in gross-motor performance (Srinivasan et al., 2015; Kaur & Bhat, 2019).

Objectives: The present study expands on this work by comparing the effects of 2 types of movement interventions, a Creative Movement (CM) intervention combining music, dance, and yoga and a General Movement (GM) intervention involving exercises and games, with a standard-of-care, sedentary play (SP) intervention on the fine and gross-motor coordination and functional endurance of children with ASD. We also compared face-to-face (F2F) and telehealth-based (TH) intervention delivery, since a subset of children in the study were seen via TH during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods: 45 children with ASD between 6 and 14 years participated in a pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) over 10 weeks with pretests and posttests conducted during the first and tenth weeks. Children were matched on age, gender, and level of functioning and then randomly assigned to either CM, GM, or SP groups. Each child received 8 weeks of training @ 2 sessions/week. The CM group engaged in whole-body, music, dance, and yoga-based activities promoting interpersonal synchrony as well as bilateral and multilimb coordination skills. The GM group engaged in turn taking-based goal-directed activities focused on whole-body strength, endurance, and agility. The SP group engaged in tabletop activities such as reading, building, and arts and crafts to promote social interactions and fine motor skills. The Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency, the Test of Gross-motor development, and the 2-minute-walk test were administered at the pre- and posttests. We also coded training-specific changes in motor coordination (unilateral, dual-limb, multilimb coordination) across early and late training sessions.

Results: From pretest to posttest, the CM group improved their body coordination (BC) composite scores. The GM group improved scores on body coordination and strength and agility (SA) composites following training. In contrast, the SP group showed no improvements in gross-motor composite scores and instead improved on the fine-motor composite. Group and individual data suggest that both movement groups improved their functional performance during the 2-minute walk test whereas the SP group did not. Irrespective of mode of intervention delivery (F2F or TH), both movement groups showed gross-motor improvements on standardized and functional tests whereas the SP group showed fine-motor improvements only.

Conclusions: This study highlights the value of CM and GM interventions in promoting gross-motor coordination and endurance skills in children with ASD. Delivering CM and GM interventions using telehealth-based interventions is a feasible alternative to F2F, in-person movement interventions. OTs and PTs working with children with ASD can use CM and GM approaches to target their clients’ motor coordination and endurance skills. This work will provide the support for inclusion of whole-body movement experiences in the standard-of-care for ASD and for OTs and PTs to be motor advocates of their clients with ASD.

Authors

• Corina Cleffi, University of Delaware
  Presenting Author

• Wan-chun Su

• Sudha M Srinivasan, University of Connecticut

• Anjana N Bhat, University of Delaware