Search

Given high rates of obesity and chronic disease in both people and dogs, it is important to understand how dogs and dog owners influence each other’s health, including physical activity (PA) levels. Research suggests that dog owners who walk their dogs are more likely to meet PA guidelines than those who do not, but few studies have investigated dog walking intensity or its contribution to dog owners’ total moderate-to-vigorous PA using accelerometry. Furthermore, no studies have examined the contribution of dog walking to dogs’ total PA or the relationship between dog and dog owner PA using accelerometers on dogs. The authors used accelerometers on 33 dog owner–dog pairs to investigate (a) the intensity of dog walking behavior, (b) the contribution of dog walking to dog owners’ overall moderate-to-vigorous PA and dogs’ overall PA, and (c) the correlation between dog and dog owner PA. Dog owners wore an ActiGraph accelerometer and logged all dog walking for 7 days; dogs wore a Fitbark activity monitor. On average, 64.1% (95% confidence interval [55.2, 73.1]) of daily dog walking was moderate to vigorous intensity, and dog walking accounted for 51.2% (95% confidence interval [44.1, 58.3]) of dog owners’ daily moderate-to-vigorous PA. Dog walking accounted for 41.2% (95% confidence interval [36.0, 46.4]) of dogs’ daily PA. Dog owners’ daily steps were moderately correlated (r = .54) with dogs’ daily activity points. These findings demonstrate the interdependence of dog and dog owner PA and can inform interventions that leverage the dog–owner bond to promote PA and health in both species.

BackgroundA sensitive test reflecting subtle sensorimotor changes throughout disease progression independent of mobility impairment is currently lacking in progressive multiple sclerosis.ObjectivesWe examined non-ambulatory measures of upper and lower extremity sensorimotor function that may reveal differences between relapsing–remitting and progressive forms of multiple sclerosis.MethodsCutaneous sensitivity, proprioception, central motor function and mobility were assessed in 32 relapsing–remitting and 31 progressive multiple sclerosis patients and 30 non-multiple sclerosis controls.ResultsCutaneous sensation differed between relapsing–remitting and progressive multiple sclerosis at the foot and to a lesser extent the hand. Proprioception function in the upper but not the lower extremity differed between relapsing–remitting and progressive multiple sclerosis, but was different for both upper and lower extremities between multiple sclerosis patients and non-multiple sclerosis controls. Foot-tap but not hand-tap speed was slower in progressive compared to relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis, suggestive of greater central motor function impairment in the lower extremity in progressive multiple sclerosis. In addition, the non-ambulatory sensorimotor measures were more sensitive in detecting differences between relapsing–remitting and progressive multiple sclerosis than mobility assessed with the 25-foot walk test.ConclusionThis study provides novel information about changes in sensorimotor function in progressive compared with relapsing–remitting forms of multiple sclerosis, and in particular the importance of assessing both upper and lower extremity function. Importantly, our findings showed loss of proprioceptive function in multiple sclerosis but also in progressive compared to relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis.

Dog owners are more physically active than non-dog owners, but evidence of a causal relationship between dog acquisition and increased physical activity is lacking. Such evidence could inform programs and policies that encourage responsible dog ownership. Randomized controlled trials are the ‘gold standard’ for determining causation, but they are prohibited in this area due to ethical concerns. In the BuddyStudy, we tested the feasibility of using dog fostering as a proxy for dog acquisition, which would allow ethical random assignment. In this single-arm trial, 11 participants fostered a rescue dog for six weeks. Physical activity and psychosocial data were collected at baseline, 6, and 12 weeks. At 6 weeks, mean change in steps/day was 1192.1 ± 2457.8. Mean changes on the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale and the Perceived Stress Scale were −4.9 ± 8.7 and −0.8 ± 5.5, respectively. More than half of participants (55%) reported meeting someone new in their neighborhood because of their foster dog. Eight participants (73%) adopted their foster dog after the 6-week foster period, some maintained improvements in physical activity and well-being at 12 weeks. Given the demonstrated feasibility and preliminary findings of the BuddyStudy, a randomized trial of immediate versus delayed dog fostering is warranted.

Background Rapid tapping tests have been shown to be reliable measures of upper motor neuron disease, and effectively examine motor function differences between multiple sclerosis (MS) and non-MS controls (CON), and between relapsing-remitting and progressive MS subtypes. To successfully perform rapid repetitive movements such as tapping, a person must be able to consistently turn on and off motor units to switch between the up and down movement phases. However, it is not clear which specific movement phase that occurs during tapping is different between MS subtypes. The objective of this study was to quantify and characterize performance differences during rapid hand- and foot-tapping tests between relapsing-remitting (RRMS) and progressive (PMS) forms of MS, as well as how both subtypes differ from non-MS controls. Methods Participants in this study included 30 non-MS controls, 32 RRMS, and 31 PMS. Participants wore inertial sensors on all hands and feet and were instructed to tap as fast as possible for 10 s. Angular velocity from the gyroscope was used to quantify inter-tap interval (ms), coefficient of variation of inter-tap interval (COV), and up- and down-movement characteristics (duration (ms), COV, peak angular velocity (rad/s)). Differences between groups were examined with ANOVA and independent t-tests. Inter-tap interval was examined for its ability to distinguish between RRMS and PMS by a binary logistic regression analysis. Up-down movement characteristics were further evaluated for within-group directional differences (up- vs. down-phase movement components) with paired-sample t-tests. Results Inter-tap interval for both hand- and foot-tapping differed between controls and MS, but only foot tapping was different between RRMS and PMS (RRMS = 286.7 ± 83.0 ms; PMS = 379.5 ± 170.9 ms; mean difference (d) = -92.8 ms). Logistic regression analysis showed foot-tap interval but not hand-tap interval has the potential to distinguish between RRMS and PMS (Area under the ROC = 0.71). Both up- and down-movement duration differences were consistent with the results for inter-tap interval, but up-movement duration showed larger mean group differences than down-movement differences. No significant group differences in overall inter-tap interval COV were detected for either hand- or foot-tapping; however, up-movement foot-tapping variation (CON = 18.7 ± 6.1; RRMS = 25.5 ± 11.2; PMS = 23.3 ± 8.6; CON vs RRMS d = -6.8; CON vs PMS d = -4.7), but not down-movement variation was different between controls and MS. Up- and down-peak angular velocity during foot-tapping were different between controls and PMS (CON Up = 1.4 ± 0.5 rad/s; PMS Up = 1.0 ± 0.4 rad/s; Up d = 0.4 rad/s; CON Down= 1.5 ± 0.6 rad/s; PMS Down = 1.2 ± 0.5 rad/s; Down d = 0.3 rad/s), and up-movement peak angular velocity differences showed larger mean group differences than the down-movement peak angular velocity between controls and PMS. Conclusion Foot-tapping differs between MS disease subtypes and has greater potential than hand-tapping to distinguish between subtypes. Performance in the up-movement showed larger group differences than the down-movement, suggesting that the anti-gravity up-movement during tapping may be more important diagnostically. Future studies should be conducted on the nature of the physiological mechanisms underlying impairments in anti-gravity movements in people with MS.