Merel Bijleveld-Uitman1, Ingrid van de Port, Gert Kwakkel. 1. Centre of Excellence for Rehabilitation Medicine Utrecht, Rehabilitation Centre De Hoogstraat and Rudolf Magnus Institute, 3583 TM Utrecht Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine if gait speed or walking distance is a better predictor for community walking after stroke. METHODS: Data from the FIT-Stroke trial were used in a cross-sectional design. Community walking was measured with a self-administered questionnaire. The 5-m timed walk and the 6-min walk were used to assess gait speed and walking distance. With bivariate regression analyses the association between gait speed or walking distance and community walking was tested and possible confounders were identified. Discriminative properties of gait speed and walking distance for community walking were investigated by means of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. RESULTS:79% of 241 patients were classified as community walkers. Standing balance, fear of falling and time post-stroke were found to be significant confounders in the relationship between gait speed and community walking. No significant confounders were found for the association between walking distance and community walking. There was no significant difference between the area under the curve of the ROC curves of gait speed (0.86), walking distance (0.89) and gait speed adjusted for confounding (0.89). CONCLUSION:Gait speed and walking distance are equally appropriate predictors for community walking after stroke, whereas the contribution of confounders is limited.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To determine if gait speed or walking distance is a better predictor for community walking after stroke. METHODS: Data from the FIT-Stroke trial were used in a cross-sectional design. Community walking was measured with a self-administered questionnaire. The 5-m timed walk and the 6-min walk were used to assess gait speed and walking distance. With bivariate regression analyses the association between gait speed or walking distance and community walking was tested and possible confounders were identified. Discriminative properties of gait speed and walking distance for community walking were investigated by means of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. RESULTS: 79% of 241 patients were classified as community walkers. Standing balance, fear of falling and time post-stroke were found to be significant confounders in the relationship between gait speed and community walking. No significant confounders were found for the association between walking distance and community walking. There was no significant difference between the area under the curve of the ROC curves of gait speed (0.86), walking distance (0.89) and gait speed adjusted for confounding (0.89). CONCLUSION: Gait speed and walking distance are equally appropriate predictors for community walking after stroke, whereas the contribution of confounders is limited.
Authors: Daniel K White; Tuhina Neogi; Wendy C King; Michael P LaValley; Stephen B Kritchevsky; Michael C Nevitt; Tamara B Harris; Luigi Ferrucci; Eleanor M Simonsick; Suzanne Satterfield; Elsa S Strotmeyer; Yuqing Zhang Journal: Phys Ther Date: 2014-05-01
Authors: Dennis R Louie; William B Mortenson; Melanie Durocher; Robert Teasell; Jennifer Yao; Janice J Eng Journal: BMC Neurol Date: 2020-01-28 Impact factor: 2.474
Authors: Dan Ben-Avraham; David Karasik; Joe Verghese; Kathryn L Lunetta; Jennifer A Smith; John D Eicher; Rotem Vered; Joris Deelen; Alice M Arnold; Aron S Buchman; Toshiko Tanaka; Jessica D Faul; Maria Nethander; Myriam Fornage; Hieab H Adams; Amy M Matteini; Michele L Callisaya; Albert V Smith; Lei Yu; Philip L De Jager; Denis A Evans; Vilmundur Gudnason; Albert Hofman; Alison Pattie; Janie Corley; Lenore J Launer; Davis S Knopman; Neeta Parimi; Stephen T Turner; Stefania Bandinelli; Marian Beekman; Danielle Gutman; Lital Sharvit; Simon P Mooijaart; David C Liewald; Jeanine J Houwing-Duistermaat; Claes Ohlsson; Matthijs Moed; Vincent J Verlinden; Dan Mellström; Jos N van der Geest; Magnus Karlsson; Dena Hernandez; Rebekah McWhirter; Yongmei Liu; Russell Thomson; Gregory J Tranah; Andre G Uitterlinden; David R Weir; Wei Zhao; John M Starr; Andrew D Johnson; M Arfan Ikram; David A Bennett; Steven R Cummings; Ian J Deary; Tamara B Harris; Sharon L R Kardia; Thomas H Mosley; Velandai K Srikanth; Beverly G Windham; Ann B Newman; Jeremy D Walston; Gail Davies; Daniel S Evans; Eline P Slagboom; Luigi Ferrucci; Douglas P Kiel; Joanne M Murabito; Gil Atzmon Journal: Aging (Albany NY) Date: 2017-01-10 Impact factor: 5.955