2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2018.07.014
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Prevalence and predictors for the ability to run in children and adolescents with cerebral palsy

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

2
23
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
2
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The study included children who were GMFCS level I (ability to perform gross motor skills including running) and II (minimal ability to perform gross motor skills including running) [ 12 , 18 ]. In retrospectively searching for up to the last 30 children with diplegic CP that underwent clinical gait analysis, five out of 25 participants at Erie, (three GMFCS Level I and two Level II) and three out of 33 participants at Spokane (all GMFCS level II) did not meet the criteria for running and were excluded from the study.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The study included children who were GMFCS level I (ability to perform gross motor skills including running) and II (minimal ability to perform gross motor skills including running) [ 12 , 18 ]. In retrospectively searching for up to the last 30 children with diplegic CP that underwent clinical gait analysis, five out of 25 participants at Erie, (three GMFCS Level I and two Level II) and three out of 33 participants at Spokane (all GMFCS level II) did not meet the criteria for running and were excluded from the study.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For children and adolescents rated at GMFCS level II mobility, it can be expected that not all participants can run since this category was defined as having minimal ability to run and jump [ 12 ]. The prevalence of running ability has been reported as 55% of children and adolescents with diplegic CP rated at GMFCS level II [ 18 ]. In practice, children at each center who did not achieve running upon visual assessment during their gait analysis did not have running data collected at all, regardless of GMFCS level.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For example, specific bony procedures, such as femoral or tibial derotation osteotomies, might be beneficial for the ability to run since they improve the muscular lever arms [ 13 ] and, therefore, enhance the muscle force output that is needed for running. Furthermore, in a previous study we identified rectus femoris muscle spasticity to be a negative predictor for the ability to run, whereas, gastrocnemius spasticity was a positive predictor [ 14 ]. Consequently, muscle tenotomies of the rectus femoris might be beneficial and calf muscle lengthening could be detrimental.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Children with cerebral palsy are classified into five groups according to the Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS) (Palisano et al, 2007). Children in GMFCS Level I are able to run, albeit with some A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T 3 | P a g e limitations, while about half the children in GMFCS level II are able to run, with more difficulty than those children in GMFCS level I (Böhm et al, 2018). Three-dimensional gait analysis is often undertaken to describe the effect of neuromuscular impairments or intervention on the gait of people with cerebral palsy (Böhm et al, 2018).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%