Understanding participation of children with cerebral palsy in family and recreational activities.
In kids with CP, communication level is the strongest lever for fun, while gross motor level sets how many activities they try.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team asked parents of children with cerebral palsy about family and fun activities. They used three quick checklists: one for gross motor skills, one for hand use, and one for talking or understanding. All kids lived in Turkey and were between 4 and 11 years old.
Parents filled out the Children’s Assessment of Participation and Enjoyment. This survey lists common play, chores, and outings. Parents marked how often the child joined and how much the child liked each one.
What they found
Better scores on all three checklists meant more joining in and more fun. Talking level mattered most for enjoyment. Even small gains in communication gave a big jump in how much kids liked the activity.
Gross motor level predicted how many different activities the family tried. Hand-use level mattered less once you knew the other two scores.
How this fits with other research
Kerem-Günel et al. (2023) looked at the same group but added teens. They found self-care skills drive participation in the under-five set, while mobility training helps teens. Together the two papers map age-tuned targets: communication for fun, self-care for tots, mobility for teens.
Dudley et al. (2019) seems to disagree. In non-ambulatory toddlers they found no link between gross motor scores and actual home movement. The key difference is age and setting. McIntyre et al. (2017) studied mostly walking children doing family outings; M et al. watched tiny non-walkers rolling on the floor. Once a child can move around the house, gross level again predicts real-world play.
Majnemer et al. (2015) tracked the same kids for years and saw participation drop as they hit adolescence. S et al. gives the baseline: start boosting communication and motor skills early to slow that later slide.
Why it matters
You can forecast how wide a child’s world will be by glancing at three numbers: GMFCS, MACS, and CFCS. If the communication score is low, make talking goals your first move—gains there pay off in smiles and willingness to stay in the game. Share these quick scores with families so they know why speech practice is as important as gait training.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Add a CFCS quick-check to your intake and pair any speech goal with a fun family outing so progress feels real.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
AIMS: The primary aim of this study was to determine the effect of age, sex, gross motor, manual ability, and communication functions on the frequency and enjoyment of children's participation in family and recreational activities. The secondary aim was to determine the relationships between motor and communication functions and participation. METHODS: Participants were 694 children, 1.5-12 years old, with cerebral palsy (CP) and their parents across the US and Canada. Parents rated children's frequency and enjoyment of participation using the Child Engagement in Daily Life measure. Parents and therapists identified children's level of function using Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS), Manual Ability Classification System (MACS), and Communication Function Classification System (CFCS). RESULTS: Differences in frequency and enjoyment of participation were found based on children's GMFCS, MACS, and CFCS levels but not age or sex. Children with higher gross motor, manual, and communication functions had higher frequency and enjoyment of participation, compared to children with lower functions. Frequency of participation was associated with GMFCS and CFCS levels whereas enjoyment of participation was only associated with CFCS level. IMPLICATIONS: Knowledge of child's gross motor, manual ability, and communication functions of children with CP is important when setting goals and planning interventions for participation.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2017 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2017.07.006