2017
DOI: 10.3138/ptc.2015-67lhc
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Associating Physical Activity Levels with Motor Performance and Physical Function in Childhood Survivors of Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia

Abstract: Purpose: This cross-sectional, observational study investigated whether physical activity (PA) levels are associated with motor performance and physical function in children after treatment for acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Method: Participants aged 8-13 years who had completed treatment for ALL (3-36 months post-treatment) were tested at their oncology long-term follow-up appointment at the British Columbia Children's Hospital. PA level was measured using the Physical Activity Questionnaire for Older Ch… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

1
3
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 47 publications
(58 reference statements)
1
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Nevertheless, MET minute/week values showed a medium effect size (1883.5 ± 1042.9 vs. 2527.7 ± 1496.2 MET minutes/week, p = 0.30, Hedge's g = 0.49 (−0.14, 1.12)), suggesting that leukemia survivors could be less physically active overall than healthy controls. This would be in line with studies reporting a lower level of physical activity in leukemia survivors [40], particularly in relation to the lack of physical activity throughout the duration of their prolonged treatments (including multiple chemotherapies and repeated hospitalizations) associated with secondary impairment of physical fitness and an increased risk of chronic health problems [41]. In Figure 3, we can see that leukemia survivors always had heart rates higher than controls, with a relative VO 2 that was lower.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…Nevertheless, MET minute/week values showed a medium effect size (1883.5 ± 1042.9 vs. 2527.7 ± 1496.2 MET minutes/week, p = 0.30, Hedge's g = 0.49 (−0.14, 1.12)), suggesting that leukemia survivors could be less physically active overall than healthy controls. This would be in line with studies reporting a lower level of physical activity in leukemia survivors [40], particularly in relation to the lack of physical activity throughout the duration of their prolonged treatments (including multiple chemotherapies and repeated hospitalizations) associated with secondary impairment of physical fitness and an increased risk of chronic health problems [41]. In Figure 3, we can see that leukemia survivors always had heart rates higher than controls, with a relative VO 2 that was lower.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…[10][11][12] De Luca et al 29 30 In the present study, the fine motor skills were evaluated using the complete fine motor form of BOT-2 (including 27 tasks divided into four subtests) because the short form of BOT-2 does not distinguish between gross and fine motor scores, resulting in misleading interpretations. 31 Accordingly, the higher percentage of fine motor impairments observed in this study may be-in part-attributed to the thorough evaluation of various fine motor subtests in children with ALL. Other possible contributing factors include the relatively large sample size in the current study compared with previous literature, selection of a specific age range (4-7 years), and the addition of a healthy control group matched for age and sex.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 68%
“…Unlike the BOT‐2, which measures a wide range of skills, the manual dexterity subtest of the Movement Assessment Battery includes only three tasks that are limited to a certain age band 30 . In the present study, the fine motor skills were evaluated using the complete fine motor form of BOT‐2 (including 27 tasks divided into four subtests) because the short form of BOT‐2 does not distinguish between gross and fine motor scores, resulting in misleading interpretations 31 …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Also, the BOT-2 brief form is a screening tool and may not be as accurate as the complete form to detect the mild impairments that may have an impact on the participation in physical activity [ 64 ]. In addition, its final score does not distinguish between gross and fine motor scores, although differences between them are important to consider in clinical assessments and designing rehabilitation interventions [ 65 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%