6533b859fe1ef96bd12b76d7

RESEARCH PRODUCT

A scoping review on interventions to promote physical activity among adults with disabilities

Grégoire BosselutKwok NgMary HassandraOscar CastroElizaveta Novoradovskaya

subject

Adult030506 rehabilitationmedia_common.quotation_subjectvammaisetPsychological interventionHealth PromotionPsycINFOCINAHLbehavior change techniques taxonomyliiikuntatottumukset03 medical and health sciences0302 clinical medicinePromotion (rank)International Classification of Functioning Disability and HealthMS-tautiHumansDisabled Personstoimintarajoitteet030212 general & internal medicineExercisemedia_commonPublic Health Environmental and Occupational HealthBehavior change methodsGeneral Medicineinternational classification of functioningspinal cord injuryvajaakuntoisetSystematic review0305 other medical sciencePsychologyInclusion (education)terveysfyysinen aktiivisuusClinical psychologyselkäydinvammaiset

description

Abstract Background Despite the strong evidence that physical activity (PA) is a key determinant of health, there is limited knowledge on the content and outcomes of PA promotion interventions among individuals with disabilities. Objective To conduct a scoping review in order to examine the published literature on PA promotion interventions among adults with disabilities. Methods A scoping review following the methodological framework provided by Arksey and O'Malley used electronic databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL), reference lists, and journals to locate studies. Inclusion criteria were based on study aim, outcome measures, and a disability definition by the WHO International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. The Behavior Change Techniques Taxonomy version 1 and Furlan and collaborators' risk of bias assessment were utilized during the data charting stage. Results Thirty-eight articles met the inclusion criteria. Most of the studies (70%) reported a significant increase in PA behavior immediately following intervention. However, less than half of the studies (46%) examined the maintenance of pre-/post-test differences. The number of identified behavior change techniques was significantly higher for successful PA promotion interventions than for interventions with no effects on PA. Approximately one-third of studies (32%) were rated as having a high risk of bias. Conclusions Although findings support the idea that PA promotion interventions produce positive changes in PA behavior for a variety of disability conditions, risk of bias assessment calls for prudence. There are opportunities for continued development of the area of PA promotion among individuals with disabilities through systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

http://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:jyu-201803261831