Carmen Woodmansee1, Andrew Hahne2, Christine Imms3, Nora Shields4. 1. Department of Rehabilitation, Sport and Nutrition, School of Allied Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne 3086, VIC, Australia. Electronic address: carmen.woodmansee@gmail.com. 2. Department of Rehabilitation, Sport and Nutrition, School of Allied Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne 3086, VIC, Australia. Electronic address: a.hahne@latrobe.edu.au. 3. School of Allied Health, Australian Catholic University, Fitzroy 3065, VIC, Australia; Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, Royal Children's Hospital, 50 Flemington Road, Parkville, Melbourne 3052, VIC, Australia; CanChild Centre for Childhood Disability Research, Institute for Applied Health Sciences, McMaster University, 1400 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, Canada L8S 1C7. Electronic address: christine.imms@acu.edu.au. 4. Department of Rehabilitation, Sport and Nutrition, School of Allied Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne 3086, VIC, Australia; Northern Health, 185 Cooper St., Epping, Melbourne 3076, VIC, Australia. Electronic address: n.shields@latrobe.edu.au.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Facilitating participation in physical recreation among children with disability is an increasingly important aim of paediatric rehabilitation. AIM: To compare the extent (diversity and frequency), context (where and companionship), experience (enjoyment) and preference for participation in physical recreation activities outside-of-school between children with disability and children with typical development. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: One hundred and sixty-three children with physical, intellectual, sensory or multiple disabilities (67 girls; mean age 10.8 yr) were matched with 163 children with typical development for age, sex, geographical location and socioeconomic status. Participation in 16 physical recreation activities (including walking, cycling, team sports) was compared between these two groups using non-parametric statistics and relative risk ratios. OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: There were significant differences between the groups in 14 activities. A lower percentage of children with disability reported participating in 5 physical recreation activities. A higher percentage of children with disability reported not participating in their preferred activities. Children with disability were less likely to participate on their own in some day-to-day physical recreation activities such as walking and cycling. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Differences between the groups related to the context (companionship) and preference for participation. Understanding and addressing these differences may enhance participation among children with disability.
BACKGROUND: Facilitating participation in physical recreation among children with disability is an increasingly important aim of paediatric rehabilitation. AIM: To compare the extent (diversity and frequency), context (where and companionship), experience (enjoyment) and preference for participation in physical recreation activities outside-of-school between children with disability and children with typical development. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: One hundred and sixty-three children with physical, intellectual, sensory or multiple disabilities (67 girls; mean age 10.8 yr) were matched with 163 children with typical development for age, sex, geographical location and socioeconomic status. Participation in 16 physical recreation activities (including walking, cycling, team sports) was compared between these two groups using non-parametric statistics and relative risk ratios. OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: There were significant differences between the groups in 14 activities. A lower percentage of children with disability reported participating in 5 physical recreation activities. A higher percentage of children with disability reported not participating in their preferred activities. Children with disability were less likely to participate on their own in some day-to-day physical recreation activities such as walking and cycling. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Differences between the groups related to the context (companionship) and preference for participation. Understanding and addressing these differences may enhance participation among children with disability.
Authors: Aviva Must; Linda G Bandini; Carol Curtin; Katherine M Rancaño; Misha Eliasziw; D J Tybor; Heidi Stanish Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-04-12 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Nora Shields; Claire Willis; Christine Imms; Luke A Prendergast; Jennifer J Watts; Ben van Dorsselaer; Georgia McKenzie; Andrea M Bruder; Nicholas F Taylor Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2020-07-08 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Rachel A Kennedy; Kate Carroll; Kade L Paterson; Monique M Ryan; Joshua Burns; Kristy Rose; Jennifer L McGinley Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-06-12 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Anni Pakarinen; Lea Hautala; Lotta Hamari; Minna Aromaa; Hannele Kallio; Pirjo-Riitta Liuksila; Matti Sillanpää; Sanna Salanterä Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-04-07 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Carmel Sivaratnam; Bethany Devenish; Tayla Chellew; Nicole Papadopoulos; Jane McGillivray; Nicole Rinehart Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-01-19 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Giulio E Lancioni; Nirbhay N Singh; Mark O'Reilly; Jeff Sigafoos; Gloria Alberti; Lorenzo Desideri Journal: JMIR Rehabil Assist Technol Date: 2022-04-07