The Importance of Physical Activity: Are Youth With Disabilities Getting Enough Movement?
Spending 30 minutes to an hour on physical exertion at the gym is probably on everyone’s list of priorities now entering 2019. “New year, new body, new me!” as most will exclaim online whilst enduring the gr
ueling effects of sweating and lifting all so they could look like a Hemsworth or Gadot. Additionally, exercise can offer multiple benefits aside from toning that physique and instilling cardiovascular endurance. For youth with cognitive disabilities physical activity can vastly improve fine motor skills, an area that this group excels less in compared to their more typical counterparts.
Furthermore, this is a population that experiences the most health problems, as well as being the most susceptible to physical unfitness, according to past studies; this is especially the case for females and individuals diagnosed with down syndrome. Hence, this highlights a greater need for pushing exercise on youth with cognitive disabilities, along with the prevailing need for more scientific research concerning this demographic.
The authors of this study, found that there was a lack of research within the scientific community regarding habitual physical activity in regards to youth with cognitive disabilities, thus forming their guiding hypothesis. The authors wanted to determine the intensity and volume of the physical activity within the youth population, and how many actually achieve the recommended 1 hour of physical activity per day. They also sought to find out how factors, such as age, sex, level of intellectual disability, and motor development impacted physical activity results.
The study was conducted on 130 able-bodied youth aged 2-18 years, all of which varied in severity of their intellectual disabilities. The physical activity of participants was monitored through a belt device called an accelerometer which recorded their movements and converted them into step counts for data analysis. Participants were required to wear these belts for 8 days, and parents had to account for sick days and other less mobile days, along with physical activities, such as swimming.
The authors analyzed the daily steps from young participants and calculated the total minutes and overall percentage of physical activity within the study’s time period, along with the total time and intensity of moderate to vigorous movement. Various experts also analyzed motor development, weight, height, and BMI (body mass index). The data that would be ultimately used in analysis was taken from 68 participants who took part in the most physical activity, approximately 8 hours within 4 days of the study. These participants, comprised of 43 boys and 25 girls of varying ages, were compared to their more sedentary counterparts for analysis.
Overall, only 47% of all 68 participants met the required 60 minutes of physical movement per day. Furthermore, boys were more representative in terms of adequate time spent on physical activity. On average, participants took a number of 6,677 ± 2,600 steps per day, with an intensity of 1,040 ± 431 counts per minute. Lower motor development was found to be associated with children who took part in less physical activity.
The authors of this study acknowledge that they do not have all the answers in regard with how to push more physical activity on children with cognitive disabilities. Naturally, more would have to be done in order to accommodate children and adults of this demographic who do not possess fully developed motor skills. If there is one takeaway from this study, it is that we, as a society, along with the scientific community should do our part to accommodate people of diverse backgrounds. As we enter the New Year, and subsequent new years to come, hopefully we will all make it our resolution to give a leg-up to populations that need it the most.
Source:
Wouters, M., Evenhuis, H. M., & Hilgenkamp, T. I. (2019). Physical activity levels of children and adolescents with moderate‐to‐severe intellectual disability. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 32(1), 131-142.
Comments