article · South African Journal of Childhood Education
Background: Proprioception encompasses position sense, posture and body movements, providing essential sensory information for learning and controlling movements, which is critical for children’s motor development, coordination and school readiness. Existing proprioceptive tests are primarily clinical, costly and difficult to apply in resource-limited settings, thus creating a need for feasible and reliable tasks to evaluate proprioception. Aim: This study aimed to establish inter-rater and test-retest reliability of existing proprioceptive tasks. Setting: This study was conducted in the Mangaung area of South Africa, involving participants from a Quintile 3 school. Methods: Twenty-four participants (50% males and 50% females) between the ages of 6 and 9 years completed six proprioceptive tasks on two occasions, 5 days apart. The performances were video recorded and rated by three reviewers. Test-retest and inter-rater reliability of each task item was calculated using the intraclass correlation coefficient for a single rater and for absolute agreement across multiple raters. Results: Three of the tests exhibited moderate test-retest reliability (shoulder-level-arm-raise both arms, finger-to-nose total and shoulder-level-arm-raise total), and one showed good reliability (Finger-to-nose eyes closed). Inter-rater reliability showed greater consistency; excellent reliability was shown for two task items (Rhomberg and force perception), and three showed moderate reliability (shoulder-level-arm-raise, both arms, and preferred arm, angels-in-the-snow and reciprocal imitations). Conclusion: The proprioceptive task items were deemed reliable to use in a field-based setting for children. Contribution: This study provides the first evidence of reliability for field-based proprioceptive tasks for South African children, identifying several tasks that can be confidently applied in school and community settings.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.4102/sajce.v16i1.1827
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.