Changes in Capacity and Performance in Mobility Across Different Environmental Settings in Children with Cerebral Palsy: An Exploratory Study
YC01-YC03
Correspondence
Dr. Shraddha Diwan,
19, Shivkunj Soc, Radhaswami Satsang Road, Ranip, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India.
E-mail: drshraddhadiwan@gmail.com
Background: Children with cerebral palsy, although having similar diagnosis, varies in their abilities & level of functioning within & across different environmental context e.g. home, school or community setting. Capacity (what a child can do in standardized, controlled environment) may or may not be the same as performance (what a child actually does do in her/her daily environment).
Materials and Methods: After getting approval from Institutional Ethic’s Committee (IEC), 63 children with cerebral palsy (4-16 year, mean 7.4 year with SD 0.39) of all clinical types, Gross Motor Functional Classification System (GMFCS) level I-V were examined for mobility using Gross Motor Functional Measure 88 (GMFM). Motor capacity was assessed in clinical setting by highest of 3 GMFM items attained, i.e., crawling (44), walks with support (68) & walks without support (70). Motor performance was measured by Functional Mobility Scale version 2.
Result: On analysis of motor capacity 42.85% children were walking without support, 15.87% were able to crawl & 26.98% were able walk with support in clinical setting. Spearman’s Correlation was done between GMFM item 70 with FMS 5 (home setting) to check correlation of capacity with performance & was found to be significantly correlated (r=0.586, p=0.04). All three GMFM items were correlated with FMS 5, 50, 500 & found positively correlated. For community setting (FMS 500), 52.38% children were lifted by parents & only 6.34% were using wheel chair mobility. A total of 21.87% patients were able to walk with or without support & still lifted by parents in school or community setting.
Conclusion: Change in capacity and performance of mobility exists mainly in school and community setting in studied population. Context should be given importance to prioritize rehabilitation process.