儿童友好型 2 分钟步行测试的可行性:交叉随机对照试验。

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q2 PEDIATRICS
Nicholas A Kanetzke, Jacqueline E Westerdahl, Chris C Cho, Adané N Durham, Victoria A Moerchen
{"title":"儿童友好型 2 分钟步行测试的可行性:交叉随机对照试验。","authors":"Nicholas A Kanetzke, Jacqueline E Westerdahl, Chris C Cho, Adané N Durham, Victoria A Moerchen","doi":"10.1080/01942638.2024.2304765","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Most studies that use the NIH Toolbox 2-Minute Walk Test with young children, modify the protocol, compromising the generalizability of outcomes. A standardizable protocol is needed. The purpose of this study was to compare the 2MWT performance of children ages 3-6 years on the standard NIH Toolbox protocol and on a modified protocol designed to support young children.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Cross-over randomized controlled trial. Fifteen typically developing children ages 3-6 years were randomly assigned to the performance order of the NIH toolbox 2MWT protocol and the Modified Accessibility Path (MAP) 2MWT protocol. Outcome variables and statistical analyses included test completion (McNemar test), distance walked (Wilcoxon signed-rank test), and accuracy (general estimating equation model with Poisson distribution).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All children completed 2 min of walking with the MAP protocol. Only 40% of children completed the NIH Toolbox protocol, with 83% of these NIH completers bolstered by previous exposure to the MAP protocol. Collapsed across the order, children also had significantly fewer errors per lap with the MAP protocol (<i>p</i> < 0.0001), despite walking a significantly greater distance (<i>p</i> = 0.006).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These findings lend preliminary support for standardized application of a 2MWT with young children when the protocol is designed to be child-friendly.</p>","PeriodicalId":49138,"journal":{"name":"Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics","volume":" ","pages":"526-541"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Feasibility of a Child-Friendly 2-Minute Walk Test: A Crossover Randomized Controlled Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Nicholas A Kanetzke, Jacqueline E Westerdahl, Chris C Cho, Adané N Durham, Victoria A Moerchen\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/01942638.2024.2304765\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Most studies that use the NIH Toolbox 2-Minute Walk Test with young children, modify the protocol, compromising the generalizability of outcomes. A standardizable protocol is needed. The purpose of this study was to compare the 2MWT performance of children ages 3-6 years on the standard NIH Toolbox protocol and on a modified protocol designed to support young children.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Cross-over randomized controlled trial. Fifteen typically developing children ages 3-6 years were randomly assigned to the performance order of the NIH toolbox 2MWT protocol and the Modified Accessibility Path (MAP) 2MWT protocol. Outcome variables and statistical analyses included test completion (McNemar test), distance walked (Wilcoxon signed-rank test), and accuracy (general estimating equation model with Poisson distribution).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All children completed 2 min of walking with the MAP protocol. Only 40% of children completed the NIH Toolbox protocol, with 83% of these NIH completers bolstered by previous exposure to the MAP protocol. Collapsed across the order, children also had significantly fewer errors per lap with the MAP protocol (<i>p</i> < 0.0001), despite walking a significantly greater distance (<i>p</i> = 0.006).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These findings lend preliminary support for standardized application of a 2MWT with young children when the protocol is designed to be child-friendly.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49138,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"526-541\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/01942638.2024.2304765\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PEDIATRICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01942638.2024.2304765","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:大多数使用美国国立卫生研究院工具箱对幼儿进行 2 分钟步行测试的研究都修改了测试方案,从而影响了测试结果的普遍性。我们需要一个标准化的方案。本研究旨在比较 3-6 岁儿童在标准 NIH 工具箱方案和为支持幼儿而设计的修改方案下的 2MWT 成绩:方法:交叉随机对照试验。15 名发育典型的 3-6 岁儿童被随机分配到 NIH 工具箱 2MWT 方案和改良无障碍路径 (MAP) 2MWT 方案的成绩顺序中。结果变量和统计分析包括测试完成度(McNemar 检验)、行走距离(Wilcoxon 符号秩检验)和准确性(泊松分布的一般估计方程模型):所有儿童都完成了 2 分钟的 MAP 步行。只有 40% 的儿童完成了 NIH 工具箱方案,其中 83% 的 NIH 完成者由于之前接触过 MAP 方案而得到了提高。从不同的顺序来看,使用 MAP 方案,儿童每圈的错误率也明显较低(P = 0.006):这些发现初步支持了在设计儿童友好型方案时对幼儿进行标准化 2MWT 的应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Feasibility of a Child-Friendly 2-Minute Walk Test: A Crossover Randomized Controlled Trial.

Aims: Most studies that use the NIH Toolbox 2-Minute Walk Test with young children, modify the protocol, compromising the generalizability of outcomes. A standardizable protocol is needed. The purpose of this study was to compare the 2MWT performance of children ages 3-6 years on the standard NIH Toolbox protocol and on a modified protocol designed to support young children.

Methods: Cross-over randomized controlled trial. Fifteen typically developing children ages 3-6 years were randomly assigned to the performance order of the NIH toolbox 2MWT protocol and the Modified Accessibility Path (MAP) 2MWT protocol. Outcome variables and statistical analyses included test completion (McNemar test), distance walked (Wilcoxon signed-rank test), and accuracy (general estimating equation model with Poisson distribution).

Results: All children completed 2 min of walking with the MAP protocol. Only 40% of children completed the NIH Toolbox protocol, with 83% of these NIH completers bolstered by previous exposure to the MAP protocol. Collapsed across the order, children also had significantly fewer errors per lap with the MAP protocol (p < 0.0001), despite walking a significantly greater distance (p = 0.006).

Conclusions: These findings lend preliminary support for standardized application of a 2MWT with young children when the protocol is designed to be child-friendly.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
4.80%
发文量
42
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: 5 issues per year Abstracted and/or indexed in: AMED; British Library Inside; Child Development Abstracts; CINAHL; Contents Pages in Education; EBSCO; Education Research Abstracts (ERA); Education Resources Information Center (ERIC); EMCARE; Excerpta Medica/EMBASE; Family and Society Studies Worldwide; Family Index Database; Google Scholar; HaPI Database; HINARI; Index Copernicus; Intute; JournalSeek; MANTIS; MEDLINE; NewJour; OCLC; OTDBASE; OT SEARCH; Otseeker; PEDro; ProQuest; PsycINFO; PSYCLINE; PubsHub; PubMed; REHABDATA; SCOPUS; SIRC; Social Work Abstracts; Speical Educational Needs Abstracts; SwetsWise; Zetoc (British Library); Science Citation Index Expanded (also known as SciSearch®); Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition; Social Sciences Citation Index®; Journal Citation Reports/ Social Sciences Edition; Current Contents®/Social and Behavioral Sciences; Current Contents®/Clinical Medicine
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信