OBJECTIVES: To determine (1) the feasibility of pedometers for stroke patients and (2) the level of agreement between pedometers and actual step count. DESIGN: Observational agreement study. SETTING: Six stroke units. PARTICIPANTS: Independently mobile stroke patients (N=50) ready for hospital discharge. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were asked to apply 3 pedometers: 1 around the neck and 1 above each hip. Patients performed a short walk lasting 20 seconds, then a 6-minute walk test 6MWT. Video recordings determined the criterion standard step count. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Agreement between the step count recorded by pedometers and the step count recorded by viewing the criterion standard video recordings of the 2 walks. RESULTS: Five patients (10%) needed assistance to put on the pedometers, and 5 (10%) could not read the step count. Thirty-nine (78%) would use pedometers again. Below a gait speed of about 0.5 m/s, pedometers did not generally detect steps. Agreement analyses showed that even above 0.5 m/s, pedometers undercounted steps for both the short walk and 6MWT; for example, the mean difference between the video recorder and pedometer around the neck was 5.93 steps during the short walk and 32.4 steps during the 6MWT. CONCLUSIONS: Pedometers are feasible but generally do not detect steps at gait speeds below about 0.5 m/s, and they undercount steps at gait speeds above 0.5 m/s.
OBJECTIVES: To determine (1) the feasibility of pedometers for stroke patients and (2) the level of agreement between pedometers and actual step count. DESIGN: Observational agreement study. SETTING: Six stroke units. PARTICIPANTS: Independently mobile stroke patients (N=50) ready for hospital discharge. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were asked to apply 3 pedometers: 1 around the neck and 1 above each hip. Patients performed a short walk lasting 20 seconds, then a 6-minute walk test 6MWT. Video recordings determined the criterion standard step count. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Agreement between the step count recorded by pedometers and the step count recorded by viewing the criterion standard video recordings of the 2 walks. RESULTS: Five patients (10%) needed assistance to put on the pedometers, and 5 (10%) could not read the step count. Thirty-nine (78%) would use pedometers again. Below a gait speed of about 0.5 m/s, pedometers did not generally detect steps. Agreement analyses showed that even above 0.5 m/s, pedometers undercounted steps for both the short walk and 6MWT; for example, the mean difference between the video recorder and pedometer around the neck was 5.93 steps during the short walk and 32.4 steps during the 6MWT. CONCLUSIONS: Pedometers are feasible but generally do not detect steps at gait speeds below about 0.5 m/s, and they undercount steps at gait speeds above 0.5 m/s.
Authors: Andrew K Dorsch; Seth Thomas; Xiaoyu Xu; William Kaiser; Bruce H Dobkin Journal: Neurorehabil Neural Repair Date: 2014-09-26 Impact factor: 3.919
Authors: Tara D Klassen; Lisa A Simpson; Shannon B Lim; Dennis R Louie; Beena Parappilly; Brodie M Sakakibara; Dominik Zbogar; Janice J Eng Journal: Phys Ther Date: 2015-08-06
Authors: Sofia Straudi; Carlotta Martinuzzi; Andrea Baroni; Maria Grazia Benedetti; Calogero Foti; Amira Sabbagh Charabati; Claudia Pavarelli; Nino Basaglia Journal: Ann Rehabil Med Date: 2016-12-30