Nora Shields1,2, Roos van den Bos3, Kirsty Buhlert-Smith1, Luke Prendergast4, Nicholas Taylor1,5. 1. a School of Allied Health , La Trobe University , Melbourne , Australia. 2. b Department of Allied Health , Northern Health , Epping , Australia. 3. c VU Medical Center , Amsterdam , The Netherlands. 4. d Department of Mathematics and Statistics , La Trobe University , Melbourne , Australia. 5. e Allied Health Clinical Research Office, Eastern Health , Melbourne , Australia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the feasibility of a student-mentored community-based exercise program for youth with disability. METHOD: Nineteen youth (nine female; mean age 18 years) with disability (seven cerebral palsy, six Down syndrome, three spina bifida, two autism spectrum disorder, one spinal cord injury) were recruited. Each participant was matched with a student mentor and exercised twice a week for 12 weeks at their local gymnasium. Five domains of feasibility were assessed: demand, implementation, practicality, limited efficacy testing, and acceptability. RESULTS: Demand comprised 55 expressions of interest. Demonstrating evidence of implementation, 91% of scheduled sessions were attended and training fidelity (comparing training load in weeks 1 and 12) showed exercise intensity significantly increased for strength and aerobic exercises. The program was practical with no major and 17 minor adverse events (e.g., muscle soreness). Limited efficacy testing was demonstrated by increased arm (4 kg, 95% CI: 1-7) and leg strength (43 kg, 95% CI: 24-62), walking endurance (80 m, 95% CI: 24-137), and improvement in three dimensions of health-related quality of life (autonomy, physical, and psychological well-being). The program was accepted very positively by participants. CONCLUSIONS: A student-mentored community-based exercise program feasibly engages youth with disability in community-based exercise. Implications for Rehabilitation A 12-week community-based student-mentored exercise program for youth with disability is feasible. Exercising in a real-world setting with a student mentor has a positive effect on physical and psychological well-being of youth with disability.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the feasibility of a student-mentored community-based exercise program for youth with disability. METHOD: Nineteen youth (nine female; mean age 18 years) with disability (seven cerebral palsy, six Down syndrome, three spina bifida, two autism spectrum disorder, one spinal cord injury) were recruited. Each participant was matched with a student mentor and exercised twice a week for 12 weeks at their local gymnasium. Five domains of feasibility were assessed: demand, implementation, practicality, limited efficacy testing, and acceptability. RESULTS: Demand comprised 55 expressions of interest. Demonstrating evidence of implementation, 91% of scheduled sessions were attended and training fidelity (comparing training load in weeks 1 and 12) showed exercise intensity significantly increased for strength and aerobic exercises. The program was practical with no major and 17 minor adverse events (e.g., muscle soreness). Limited efficacy testing was demonstrated by increased arm (4 kg, 95% CI: 1-7) and leg strength (43 kg, 95% CI: 24-62), walking endurance (80 m, 95% CI: 24-137), and improvement in three dimensions of health-related quality of life (autonomy, physical, and psychological well-being). The program was accepted very positively by participants. CONCLUSIONS: A student-mentored community-based exercise program feasibly engages youth with disability in community-based exercise. Implications for Rehabilitation A 12-week community-based student-mentored exercise program for youth with disability is feasible. Exercising in a real-world setting with a student mentor has a positive effect on physical and psychological well-being of youth with disability.
Entities:
Keywords:
Feasibility; community based; disability; physical activity; student mentor
Authors: Nora Shields; Arthur A Stukas; Kirsty Buhlert-Smith; Luke A Prendergast; Nicholas F Taylor Journal: Physiother Can Date: 2021 Impact factor: 1.037
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: Ruth Cabeza-Ruiz; Francisco Javier Alcántara-Cordero; Isaac Ruiz-Gavilán; Antonio Manuel Sánchez-López Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2019-07-27 Impact factor: 3.390