Open AccessPrograms Using Stimulation-Regulating Technologies to Promote Physical Activity in People With Intellectual and Multiple Disabilities: Scoping Review
Author(s) -
Giulio E. Lancioni,
Nirbhay N. Singh,
Mark F. O’Reilly,
Jeff Sigafoos,
Gloria Alberti,
Lorenzo Desideri
Publication year - 2022
Publication title -
jmir rehabilitation and assistive technologies
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 2369-2529
DOI - 10.2196/35217
Subject(s) - psycinfo , cinahl , checklist , intellectual disability , inclusion (mineral) , psychology , intervention (counseling) , systematic review , multiple disabilities , psychological intervention , cochrane library , medline , applied psychology , medical education , gerontology , medicine , meta analysis , developmental psychology , social psychology , cognitive psychology , political science , psychiatry , law
Background People with intellectual and multiple disabilities tend to engage in very low levels of physical activity. Objective This review paper aims to provide a comprehensive picture of intervention programs using stimulation-regulating technologies to promote forms of physical activity in people with intellectual and multiple disabilities. Methods Following the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist, a scoping review was conducted to identify and provide a synthesis of eligible studies published in English between 2010 and 2021. Studies were identified by searching PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO, ERIC, and CINAHL as well as by using Google Scholar and manual searches. Studies were included if they involved individuals with intellectual or multiple disabilities, used stimulation-regulating technology systems to help participants engage in physical activity, and reported data on the impact of the intervention. Results A total of 42 studies met the inclusion criteria. These studies were divided into 2 groups based on whether they pursued the increase in physical activity through technology-aided delivery of brief periods of preferred stimulation contingent on specific responses or the use of video games (exergames) and related auditory and visual stimulation. Subsequently, a narrative synthesis of the studies was provided. Conclusions The evidence reported by the 2 groups of studies is encouraging. However, further research is needed to compare the overall applicability and impact of the intervention strategies proposed by these groups of studies.