Similarities and dissimilarities between the movement ABC-2 and the Zurich neuromotor assessment in children with suspected developmental coordination disorder.

The team gave two motor tests to kids who might have developmental coordination disorder. One test was the Movement ABC-2. The other was the Zurich Neuromotor Assessment.

They wanted to see if both tests tell the same story or pick up different skills.

The total scores lined up pretty well, but each test caught unique pieces. The M-ABC-2 leaned toward balance and fine-hand tasks. The ZNA spotted other neuromotor signs.

Using just one tool would miss part of the picture.

Robertson et al. (2013) also used the M-ABC-2 and warned that extra body fat can drag down balance scores. Their tip pairs well with H et al.'s call to add a second test so you do not blame fat for clumsiness.

Park et al. (2024) pooled 27 studies and kept the revised DCDQ in the front pocket for quick screening. Schroeder et al. (2014) show that after the parent form raises a flag, you still need both the M-ABC-2 and ZNA to map the full motor profile.

Alonso Soriano et al. (2015) surveyed parents and found long waits and mixed feelings about the whole process. Running two short motor tests, as H et al. suggest, could shorten the guesswork and ease parent stress.

If you screen with the DCDQ, follow it with both the M-ABC-2 and the ZNA. One gives balance and dexterity numbers; the other picks up different neuromotor signs. Together they cut the risk of missing or mis-labeling DCD, and you can write a clearer report for the doctor and the family.