4.4 Article

Objective measurement of weekly physical activity and sensory modulation problems in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder

期刊

RESEARCH IN DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES
卷 34, 期 10, 页码 3477-3486

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ridd.2013.07.021

关键词

Attention deficit hyperactivity; disorder (ADHD); Daily life; Hyperactivity; Objective measures; Physical activity (PA); Sensory modulation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aimed to objectively compare the daily physical activity (PA), as indicated by moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) during a week and metabolic equivalents (METs) per minute, between children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and typically developing children. Moreover, sensory modulation problems were examined using behavioral and physiological measures. Twenty boys with ADHD (mean age 8.64 +/- 2.57 years), and 20 matched typically developing boys (mean age 9.10 +/- 1.79 years) participated in our study. Each child wore a PA monitor for 14 h a day, seven days a week. All participants' parents were asked to fill out daily activity logs for their children. The problems of sensory modulation were detected using sensory profile (SP) questionnaires and Sensory Challenge Protocol that measured electrodermal response (EDR) to repeated sensory stimulation. Compared with the controls, the children with ADHD had a generally higher level of PA (1.48 +/- 0.10 vs. 1.60 +/- 0.12 METs/min; p = 001), and tended to spend more time in MVPA on weekdays (35.71%) and the weekend (57.14%). However, when analyzing hourly recorded PA, the group differences were obvious only for certain hours. Our data suggested that children with ADHD were more hyperactive in structure-free than structured settings. The ADHD group showed their sensory modulation problems on the SP but not on the EDR. We found some correlations between sensory modulation problems and hyperactivity in children with ADHD. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据