Menu
Enrolling by invitation NCT07132138

Scooter Board Activities Versus Core Stability Exercises

No phase Interventional Diplegic Cerebral Palsy

For patients and families

In plain language

An automatic summary of structured registry data. It is an orientation aid, not a substitute for the official protocol or a physician assessment.

What is being studied
The protocol lists: Scooter Board Activities, Core Stability Exercises.
Who it may be relevant to
Registry conditions: Diplegic Cerebral Palsy. Basic parameters: 6 years — 10 years · All.
What needs checking
Age, condition and sex are only basic indicators. Prior treatment, laboratory values and other mandatory requirements appear in the eligibility criteria below.
Where it takes place
Egypt
Next step
Save the trial, show it to the treating physician, and confirm current recruitment with the study center. Costs, documents and travel →

Unsure about the terms? Read our patient guide →

Official title

Scooter Board Activities Versus Core Stability Exercises on Enhancing Trunk Postural Control and Balance in Children With Diplegic Cerebral Palsy: A Randomized Comparative Trial

Overview

Children with diplegic cerebral palsy (CP) often experience impaired trunk control and balance, which limits functional mobility. Core stability exercises are commonly used in pediatric physical therapy to improve trunk control. Scooter board activities, which challenge trunk stability through dynamic movement, may offer an engaging alternative. This study aims to compare the effects of these two interventions.

Detailed description

Children with spastic diplegic cerebral palsy (CP) often present with impaired trunk postural control and reduced balance stability, which negatively affect their functional independence, gait, and participation in daily activities.

Core stability training is widely recognized in pediatric rehabilitation as a method to enhance trunk strength and improve postural alignment.

Scooter board activities, however, add an element of dynamic movement, sensory stimulation, and task-oriented play, potentially offering greater engagement and functional carryover.

This study directly compares the two approaches in order to establish evidence-based guidance for clinical practice.

Interventions

  • Other Scooter Board Activities
    Scooter board bear walk. Scooter board crab walk. Sitting on scooter board, use it to move forward and backward, move the pool rings from one end to another. Cross sitting on scooter board, pulls along the rope using his/her hands Sit with knees pulled into the chest (like a bug pose) and move around with arms only. Prone over scooter board, pulling rope to move forward. Pull self along an anchored rope to retrieve items Scooter rolls outs. Place knees on floor and hands holding the edge of th
  • Other Core Stability Exercises
    Bridges Bird-dog Sit-ups on therapy ball Static and dynamic trunk holds

Primary outcome measures

  • Trunk Control Measurement Scale (TCMS) [Time frame: before and after 3 months of intervention]
Secondary outcome measures (1)
  • Pediatric Balance Scale (PBS) [Time frame: before and after 3 months of intervention]

Eligibility criteria

Inclusion criteria

  • CP with a diplegia
  • Age 6 to 10 years
  • Grade 1 and 2 according to the Modified Ashworth scale (RW and Smith, 1987).
  • They could walk with limitation or holding on according to GMFCS (level I\&II \&III) (Palisano et al., 1997).
  • They were able to understand and follow verbal instructions

Exclusion criteria

  • Children with any surgical interference in the upper limb.
  • intellectual disability such that simple tasks could not be understood or executed.
  • Children with any visual or auditory problems.
  • Children with any surgical interference in the lower limb.
  • Children with any structural deformities in joints and bones of lower limbs.
  • Children who suffer from other diseases or associated disorders that interfered with physical activity

Criteria are shown verbatim from the registry (in English). Final eligibility is always assessed by the study center.

Healthy volunteers: No

Study design

Allocation
Randomized
Model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Open label
Primary purpose
Treatment

Study locations

Egypt · 1 center
  • Cairo University — Cairo

Identifiers

NCT: NCT07132138 · Study 4

Primary sources (government registries)

View this study on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗