Relationship between sensory processing patterns and gross motor function of children and adolescents with Down syndrome and typical development: a cross-sectional study.
Kids with Down syndrome have weaker legs and touchier skin; fixing the touch piece can unlock better walking, running, and jumping.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Brugnaro et al. (2024) compared kids and teens with Down syndrome to same-age peers without disabilities.
They gave standard tests for sensory processing and big-muscle skills like walking, running, and jumping.
The team then looked for links between touch sensitivity and each motor task.
What they found
Children with Down syndrome scored much lower on every gross-motor item.
They also showed far more touch defensiveness and seeking.
The tighter a child’s touch issues, the weaker their walk-run-jump scores.
How this fits with other research
Salami et al. (2014) saw no energy-loss difference in adults with DS during obstacle walking.
Brugnaro et al. (2024) still find large gait delays in kids.
The gap closes with age: kids struggle, but adults learn to walk efficiently even if slowly.
Marchal et al. (2016) show aiming and catching peak early in DS; Brugnaro et al. (2024) now add that basic locomotion lags too.
Why it matters
If a school-age client with DS trips or avoids playground equipment, screen touch processing first.
Light brushing, deep-pressure socks, or textured insoles may calm the system and free the legs to move.
Pair sensory input with gait drills—one minute of firm pressure followed by ten practice steps—to build both tolerance and skill in the same session.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Before gait practice, give 30 s of firm hand squeezes to the calves and soles, then cue five walk-jog laps while the input is still regulating.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
BACKGROUND: Children and adolescents with Down syndrome (DS) may experience impairments in sensory and motor skills that can be interrelated. The purposes of this study were (i) to compare the sensory processing patterns and gross motor function between children and adolescents with DS and with typical development (TD) and (ii) to explore associations between these areas in both DS and TD groups. METHOD: This cross-sectional study involved a sample size of 25 participants with DS (mean age 10.24 ± 2.04 years) and 25 participants with TD (mean age 10.04 ± 2.82 years). The sensory processing patterns were assessed using the Sensory Profile Second Version questionnaire, and the gross motor function was measured with the Gross Motor Function Measure (GMFM-88) dimensions (D) standing, and (E) walking, running, and jumping. Differences between groups were tested using the Mann-Whitney test, and the relationship between the variables was examined using Spearman's correlation tests, with a significance level set at 5%. RESULTS: Children with DS showed greater difficulties with sensory processing than TD children in Seeker (P < 0.001), Avoider (P < 0.001), Sensitivity (P < 0.001), Registration (P < 0.001), Auditory (P < 0.001), Touch (P = 0.001), Movements (P = 0.001), Oral (P = 0.028), Conduct (P = 0.005), Socioemotional (P < 0.001), and Attentional (P < 0.001) domains. Additionally, children with DS presented lower gross motor function than TD in GMFM-88, standing (P < 0.001) and walking, running, and jumping (P < 0.001). Correlations were found between greater difficulties with sensory processing in Touch and lower gross motor function in walking, running, and jumping for the DS group. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest there are more difficulties in sensory processing patterns and gross motor function in children with DS than in TD. Also, there is a single association between more difficulties in sensory processing and less well-developed motor function in the DS group. Therefore, a comprehensive assessment of all these aspects should be performed in children and adolescents with DS, along with the provision of relevant interventions addressing specific needs.
Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR, 2024 · doi:10.1111/jir.13118