Physical activity of children and adolescents who use a wheelchair: a systematic review.

Physical activity has numerous health benefits for people with physical disabilities. Nevertheless, activity levels are often below recommended levels. To promote physical activity among children and adolescents who use a wheelchair as their primary source of mobility, this systematic review explores the physical activity patterns of this group. A systematic search of PubMed, Sports Medicine & Education Index, Web of Science, and SPORTDiscus was performed, included articles were synthesized in terms of duration, intensity, and settings in which physical activity occurred, as well as the physical activity measurement methods. Nine articles were included. The mean overall physical activity level across the included studies was 98 minutes per day (range: 78-115 minutes per day). Two articles analysed the duration of physical activity at different intensities (very light physical activity, light physical activity (LPA), moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) and intensities near to maximum). Within the included articles, both subjective and objective measurement methods were used. Due to the small number of articles, combined with small sample sizes, there is not enough evidence to answer the research questions sufficiently. Nevertheless, the review provides an overview of actual research and clearly shows that the physical activity values are insufficiently researched. There is a need for further research on the scope, types and settings of physical activity in the target group.

Determination of cut-off points for the Move4 accelerometer in children aged 8-13 years.

BACKGROUND: To assess physical activity (PA) there is a need of objective, valid and reliable measurement methods like accelerometers. Before these devices can be used for research, they need to be calibrated and validated for specific age groups as the locomotion differs between children and adults, for instance. Therefore, the aim of the present study was the calibration and validation of the Move4 accelerometer for children aged 8-13 years. METHODS: 53 normal weighted children (52% boys, 48%girls) aged 8-13 years (mean age = 10.69 ± 1.46, mean BMI = 17.93 kg/m- 2, 60th percentile), wore the Move4 sensor at four different body positions (thigh, hip, wrist and the Move4ecg including heart rate measurement at the chest). They completed nine activities that considered the four activity levels (sedentary behavior (SB), light PA (LPA), moderate PA (MPA) and vigorous PA (VPA)) within a test-retest design. Intensity values were determined using the mean amplitude deviation (MAD) as well as the movement acceleration intensity (MAI) metrics. Determination of activities and energy expenditure was validated using heart rate. After that, cut-off points were determined in Matlab by using the Classification and Regression Trees (CART) method. The agreement for the cut-off points between T1 and T2 was analyzed. RESULTS: MAD and MAI accelerometer values were lowest when children were lying on the floor and highest when running or doing jumping jacks. The mean correlation coefficient between acceleration values and heart rate was 0.595 (p = 0.01) for MAD metric and 0.611 (p = 0.01) for MAI metric, indicating strong correlations. Further, the MAD cut-off points for SB-LPA are 52.9 mg (hip), 62.4 mg (thigh), 86.4 mg (wrist) and 45.9 mg (chest), for LPA-MPA they are 173.3 mg (hip), 260.7 mg (thigh), 194.4 mg (wrist) and 155.7 mg (chest) and for MPA-VPA the cut-off points are 543.6 mg (hip), 674.5 mg (thigh), 623.4 mg (wrist) and 545.5 mg (chest). Test-retest comparison indicated good values (mean differences = 9.8%). CONCLUSION: This is the first study investigating cut-off points for children for four different sensor positions using raw accelerometer metrics (MAD/MAI). Sensitivity and specificity revealed good values for all positions. Nevertheless, depending on the sensor position, metric values differ according to the different involvement of the body in various activities. Thus, the sensor position should be carefully chosen depending on the research question of the study.