4.5 Review

Influences and Barriers on Physical Activity in Pediatric Oncology Patients

Journal

FRONTIERS IN PEDIATRICS
Volume 4, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fped.2016.00131

Keywords

childhood cancer; pediatric oncology; exercise; influence; perspective; intervention; physical activity

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: To determine the influence of family, peers, school, and physicians on exercise in pediatric oncology patients and evaluate the barriers to physical activity (PA) levels in this population. Methods: A search of PubMed and Google Scholar resulted in 12 related articles. The articles were assessed for the influence of school systems, family, peers, self-efficacy, and physicians on exercise. Additionally, barriers and interventions to PA were also assessed. Limitations and research methodologies of each article were also evaluated. Results: Many school systems were unsure of expectations in regards to PA for their returning students with cancer. Most schools acknowledged willingness to increase exercise for these students; however, there is a communication gap between the medical field and the school system on what expectations should be. Family is associated with increased PA levels and healthier diets in this population with children preferring mothers as exercise partners more than fathers. While physician interventions have been shown to positively impact PA, it has been reported that physicians are not engaging in exercise counseling with their patients. Conclusion: Several issues and barriers related to PA in pediatric oncology population were identified. Studies have demonstrated that it is feasible to increase PA and self-efficacy in this population. Further research is needed to better understand and quantify these issues as well as further test the interventions that have been suggested in this review and have been successful in other pediatric populations.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available