C M Dean1, C L Richards, F Malouin. 1. Centre interdisciplinaire de recherche en réadaptation et intégration sociale (CIRRIS) de l'Institut de réadaptation en déficience physique de Québec, Canada. C.dean@cchs.usyd.edu.au
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine 10-m comfortable walking speed and 6-minute distance in healthy individuals and individuals after stroke and to assess the level of disability associated with poor walking endurance after stroke. DESIGN: Descriptive study in which comfortable walking speed over 10 m and distance covered in 6 minutes (6-minute walk test) were compared between healthy subjects and subjects after stroke. SUBJECTS: Twelve healthy subjects and 14 subjects after stroke. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Walking speed and 6-minute distances were compared between groups. In addition, for each group, actual distance walked in 6 minutes was compared with the distance predicted by the 10-m walking speed test and the distance predicted by normative reference equations. RESULTS: Subjects after stroke had significant reductions in 10-m speed and 6-minute distance compared with healthy subjects (p < 0.05). Subjects after stroke were not able to maintain their comfortable walking speed for 6 minutes, whereas healthy subjects walked in excess of their comfortable speed for 6 minutes. The average distance walked in 6 minutes by individuals after stroke was only 49.8+/-23.9% of the distance predicted for healthy individuals with similar physical characteristics. CONCLUSION: In our subjects after stroke, walking speed over a short distance overestimated the distance walked in 6 minutes. Both walking speed and endurance need to be measured and trained during rehabilitation.
OBJECTIVE: To examine 10-m comfortable walking speed and 6-minute distance in healthy individuals and individuals after stroke and to assess the level of disability associated with poor walking endurance after stroke. DESIGN: Descriptive study in which comfortable walking speed over 10 m and distance covered in 6 minutes (6-minute walk test) were compared between healthy subjects and subjects after stroke. SUBJECTS: Twelve healthy subjects and 14 subjects after stroke. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Walking speed and 6-minute distances were compared between groups. In addition, for each group, actual distance walked in 6 minutes was compared with the distance predicted by the 10-m walking speed test and the distance predicted by normative reference equations. RESULTS: Subjects after stroke had significant reductions in 10-m speed and 6-minute distance compared with healthy subjects (p < 0.05). Subjects after stroke were not able to maintain their comfortable walking speed for 6 minutes, whereas healthy subjects walked in excess of their comfortable speed for 6 minutes. The average distance walked in 6 minutes by individuals after stroke was only 49.8+/-23.9% of the distance predicted for healthy individuals with similar physical characteristics. CONCLUSION: In our subjects after stroke, walking speed over a short distance overestimated the distance walked in 6 minutes. Both walking speed and endurance need to be measured and trained during rehabilitation.
Authors: Marghuretta D Bland; Audra Sturmoski; Michelle Whitson; Lisa Tabor Connor; Robert Fucetola; Thy Huskey; Maurizio Corbetta; Catherine E Lang Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2012-03-20 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: Carol L Richards; Anne Durand; Francine Malouin; Sylvie Nadeau; Joyce Fung; Line D'Amours; Claire Perez Journal: Physiother Can Date: 2020 Impact factor: 1.037
Authors: Ming Wu; Jill M Landry; Janis Kim; Brian D Schmit; Sheng-Che Yen; Jillian Macdonald Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2014-01-16 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: Megan M Rybar; Eric R Walker; Henry R Kuhnen; Daniel R Ouellette; Reivian Berrios; Sandra K Hunter; Allison S Hyngstrom Journal: Gait Posture Date: 2014-01-31 Impact factor: 2.840
Authors: J Montes; M P McDermott; W B Martens; S Dunaway; A M Glanzman; S Riley; J Quigley; M J Montgomery; D Sproule; R Tawil; W K Chung; B T Darras; D C De Vivo; P Kaufmann; R S Finkel Journal: Neurology Date: 2010-03-09 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Catherine M Dean; Chris Rissel; Michelle Sharkey; Catherine Sherrington; Robert G Cumming; Ruth N Barker; Stephen R Lord; Sandra D O'Rourke; Catherine Kirkham Journal: BMC Neurol Date: 2009-07-22 Impact factor: 2.474