This workshop will provide an overview of some of the best available research on strategies to increase physical activity among children and adults with physical disabilities. We will also demonstrate how that research is being put into practice to enhance physical activity knowledge and participation in the disability community. A variety of tools and services will be shared including the Get in Motion physical activity counseling service and the Active Living Leaders training program.

1. Evidence-based Innovations to Enhance
Physical Activity Participation Among
Persons with Physical Disabilities
1
Dr. Kathleen Martin Ginis, McMaster University Department of Kinesiology
Dr. Kelly Arbour-Nicitopoulos, University of Toronto; Bloorview Research
Institute
Julian Baird, SCI Action Canada - Get in Motion

2. Research-Based Strategies to
Increasing Community-Based
Physical Activity
Dr. Kelly Arbour-Nicitopoulos
University of Toronto
Bloorview Research Institute
2

3. Youth with Disabilities
3
The Igniting Fitness Possibilities
Program
Supported by:

4. The Need for Inclusive
Programming
 Inclusion: encourages those of all abilities to engage
in meaningful participation together in an environment
which fosters a sense of belongingness and
autonomy.
Inclusive programs can provide:
Program barriers
Attitudinal barriers
Suitable physical
environment
Physical barriers
Adapted curriculum and
trained staff
Social opportunities

6. The IFP Program
Youth with
disabilities
(Grades 4-12)
Typically
developing
youth
(Grades 4-12)
QUICKSTART
Baseline fitness
and sports skills
development
“FUNdamental
”
(16 sessions over
8 to 16 weeks)
GIVE IT A
TRY
Engage in
chosen sports
and fitness
programs
“Learn to
Train/Active for
Life”
(6-12 weeks)
Choose a
Community
Program(s)/
Set goals
Coach Supported
Athlete and
Peer
Ambassador
Program

7. IFP Program Goals
Primary Goals
 Participants
 Gain positive attitude towards PA
 Understand PA benefits, motivated to continue, can set
own goals
 Build confidence to try new PA in their neighbourhood
 Staff
 Develop enhanced personal knowledge to plan,
implement, and support inclusive PA programs
Additional Goals
 Participants
 Are increasingly active at end of program*
 Gain additional understanding of how to create inclusive
PA to bring other youth into their ‘games’

8. Changes in Aerobic Fitness
(6 Minute Walk Test)
400
450
500
550
600
(seconds)
*
* p < .05
Pre Post
(Arbour-Nicitopoulos, Leo, Faulkner, & Wright, in preparation)

9. Changes in Wear Time as a Function of
PA Intensity Level
0
20
40
60
80
100
Sedentary Light Moderate Vigorous
Pre
Post
*
*
* p < .05 (Arbour-Nicitopoulos, Leo, Faulkner, & Wright, in preparation)

10. Changes in Motivation
0
1
2
3
4
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
**RAI
Pre
Post
* Assessed on a 0 (not true for me) to 4 (very true for me) scale
** RAI indicates the degree to which individuals feel self-
determined (weighted score)
*
*
*
*p < .05
(Arbour-Nicitopoulos, Leo, Faulkner, & Wright, in preparation)

11. Adults with Physical Disabilities
11
Physical Activity Counselling
Get In Motion Service
Partners:

12. Health Action Process Approach (HAPA)
Model (Schwarzer, 1992; 2008)

13. Planning Process
• Action Plans
• Forming action plans promotes physical activity
• Coping Plans
▫ Anticipated barrier + coping strategy
▫ “If x occurs, then I will do y”
(Gollwitzer, 1999; Sniehotta et al., 2006)
(Arbour-Nicitopoulos & Martin Ginis, 2009;
Latimer et al., 2006)

14. Are action and coping planning
effective strategies for helping
individuals with spinal cord
injury become more active
within their community?

15. Intervention
Action Planning
Condition
• Plan 30 min of
moderate to heavy
physical activity
per week
• Specify: where,
when, type,
duration &
intensity
 Self-monitor
Action + Coping
Planning
Condition
• Same as Action
Planning condition
+
• Coping Plan
– 3 self-identified
barriers + strategy
 Self-monitor
Goal: Participate in 3, 30-min bouts of moderate-
heavy physical activity per week
(Latimer, Martin Ginis & Arbour, 2006; Arbour-Nicitopoulos, Martin Ginis & Latimer, 2009).
Control
Condition
• List of interested
activities
• Self-monitor

16. Procedure
Baseline Week 8/10Week 4/5Week 1

LTPA LTPA LTPALTPA
(Latimer et al., 2006;
Arbour-Nicitopoulos, 2009)
Intervention Intervention

17. Group Differences in Mean Daily Minutes
of Moderate-to-Vigorous LTPA
Control Action Planning
(Latimer et al., 2006)
*

18. Group Differences in Mean Weekly Minutes of Moderate
to Vigorous LTPA
0
25
50
75
100
Week1 Week5 Week10
Action Planning Action + Coping
(Arbour-Nicitopoulos et al., 2009)

19. A Free Physical Activity
Counseling Service

20. Get in Motion Protocol
(Service + Research)
6mo
 Intentions
 Behaviour
 Intentions
 Behaviour
 Intentions
 Behaviour
 Intentions
 Behaviour
(Arbour-Nicitopoulos et al., 2009, 2014; Latimer et al., 2006)
Enrol 2mo 4moWeekly
Biweekl
y Monthly

21. • 65 clients
• Representativeness:
• Age: 50.42±12.78 years
• YPI: 14.46±12.69 years
• Male (57%)
• Tetraplegia (52%)
• Wheelchair users (83%)
• Post-secondary education (65%)
• From Ontario (62%)
 Older (Farry & Baxter, 2010)
 More females (CPA, 2000)
 More from ON (Farry & Baxter, 2010)
Get In Motion: Reach
(June 2008 – June 2011)
(Arbour-Nicitopoulos, Tomasone, Latimer-Cheung & Martin Ginis, 2014)

22. 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Baseline 2-months 4-months 6-months
Intentions(/7)
Intentions
F(2.81,126.29) = 0.91 p = .43
Get In Motion: Effectiveness
(June 2008 – June 2011)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Baseline 2-months 4-months 6-months
%clients
Clients who are
"regularly active"
*
*X2(1) = 6.13, p = .01
(Arbour-Nicitopoulos et al., 2014)

23. Effects of Counselling on Behaviour
Table 5.
Descriptive statistics and correlations between changes in behaviour and implementation dose, content, and pe
baseline and 6 months.
Variable M±SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1. ! Aerobic
MVPA
10.48±64.96 --
2. ! Strength
MVPA
22.84±40.79 -.145 --
3. ! Total
MVPA
33.32±71.52 .826
++
.439
*
--
4. Total
duration
103.11±71.66
(0-248)
.479
*
-.215 .312 --
5. Total
sessions
5.93±4.01
(0-13)
.534
**
-.278 .327 .925
++
--
6. Info
duration
29.99±27.99
(0-103.60)
.222 -.188 .095 .775
++
.782
**
--
7. Info
times
13.63±10.83
(0-41)
.398
*
-.295 .193 .765
++
.841
++
.824
++
--
8. Behav
duration
29.34±24.81
(0-81.34)
.226 -.156 .116 .848
**
.873
++
.803
**
.819
++
--
9. Behav
times
10.17±7.16
(0-25)
.458
*
-.141 .336 .895
++
.688
++
.524
*
.789
++
.874
++
--
10. New
information
6.00±1.59
(2-7)
.135 -.251 -.008 -.103 -.243 -.282 .114 -.184 -.006 --
11. Interesting 6.50±0.69
(5-7)
.417 -.366 .189 .130 -.047 -.080 .321 .066 .234 .724
++
12. Easy to
understand
6.55±0.76
(4-7)
.116 -.137 .035 .242 .148 .145 .227 .333 .306 .010
13. Credible 6.65±0.49
(6-7)
.532
*
-.543 .202 .462
*
.574
**
.394 .271 .370 .447
*
.271
14. Personally
important
6.60±0.68
(5-7)
.414 -.030 .360 .565
**
.679
++
.372 .377 .351 .570
**
.389
 Dose
 Content
 Perceived credibility
(Tomasone, Arbour-Nicitopoulos, Latimer-Cheung & Martin Ginis, 2014)

24. Free Physical Activity
Counseling Service for
Adults with Physical
Disabilities*
 SCI*
 Multiple Sclerosis*
 Cerebral Palsy*
 Amputation
 Post-Polio
 Stroke
 Arthritis