Sprint-Intensity Arm Interval Training May Improve Cardiorespiratory Fitness and Cardiometabolic Health Among Children With Mobility Disabilities: Case Report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: There are limited options for aerobic exercise options that improve cardiorespiratory fitness and manage cardiometabolic health that are also age-appropriate and suitable for children with mobility disabilities. Children with disabilities require exercise programs that incorporate adapted movements to meet various functional needs, which offer brief training durations to accommodate busy schedules and use remote training methods at home to bypass logistical transportation barriers. Objective: The aim of this study is to test the potential effects and safety of a sprint-intensity arm-exercise interval training program, combined with music and telehealth, on cardiorespiratory fitness and cardiometabolic health in a child with cerebral palsy. Methods: This study was a 12-week exercise intervention from pretrial to posttrial for a single child with cerebral palsy (male, age 17 y). The intervention was conducted at the participant's homes. The participant exercised 3 times per week while following along with YouTube exercise videos. Videos included 4-second maximal sprint bouts followed by periods of rest, which were repeated 30 times during a single exercise session (total of ~2 minutes of maximal exercise). Exercise sessions were supervised by research staff using videoconferencing. Cardiorespiratory fitness was indicated by peak oxygen consumption (pVO2), which was measured by a portable metabolic cart during a graded exercise test. Cardiometabolic health outcomes included body composition by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry scan and a cardiometabolic blood profile by a dried blood spot test. Outcomes were descriptively analyzed. Results: The participant achieved a 33.6% increase in pVO2 (14.6 to 19.5 mL/kg-1/min-1), a 37.8% improvement in blood triglycerides (82 to 51 mg/dL), and a 15.4% improvement in the total cholesterol to high-density lipoprotein ratio (6.5 to 5.5). Additionally, he had a 5.9% reduction in body weight (171 to 161 lbs) and a 9.6% reduction in total body fat (61.35 to 55.48 lbs) from the arms, legs, and trunk. The participant experienced no adverse events or problems during the intervention. After completing the program, the participant elicited a maximal intensity of exercise using armbands, as demonstrated through pVO2. Conclusions: Sprint-intensity interval training that uses the arms may be safe and potentially effective for enhancing cardiorespiratory fitness and cardiometabolic health in children with physical disabilities. Further research is needed to verify the outcomes of this case report.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".