Prasath Jayakaran1, Lorraine DeSouza2, John Cossar3, Kenneth Gilhooly4. 1. Centre for Research in Rehabilitation, School of Health Sciences and Social Care, Brunel University, London, United Kingdom; Centre for Health, Activity, and Rehabilitation Research, School of Physiotherapy, P.O. Box 56, University of Otago, New Zealand 9054(∗). Electronic address: prasath.jayakaran@otago.ac.nz. 2. Centre for Research in Rehabilitation, School of Health Sciences and Social Care, Brunel University, London, United Kingdom(†). 3. Centre for Research in Rehabilitation, School of Health Sciences and Social Care, Brunel University, London, United Kingdom(‡). 4. Centre for Research in Rehabilitation, School of Health Sciences and Social Care, Brunel University, London, United Kingdom(§).
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of using a walking aid on temporal and spatial parameters of gait when used for balance versus support on the dominant and nondominant hand side. DESIGN: Repeated measures observational study design. SETTING: University gymnasium. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-seven healthy male and female adults of mean ± standard deviation age 44.74 ± 10.00 years. METHODS: Five walking conditions (C) were completed by all participants on the GAITRite pressure mat. Normal walking (C1), walking with a cane in the dominant hand (C2) and nondominant hand (C3) as if using for balance, walking with a cane in the dominant hand (C4) and nondominant hand (C5) while allowing approximately 10% of the body weight through the cane. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Temporal measurements (swing time, stance time, single limb support time, double limb support time) as percentage of a gait cycle and the base of support for the left and the right foot for all 5 walking conditions. RESULTS: A significant difference (P < .001) was observed between C1, C2, and C3 in percentage swing time and percentage stance time of the ipsilateral side, and in percentage single limb support time of the contralateral side. The double limb support time was significantly different (P ≤ .04) for both ipsilateral and contralateral sides. Comparisons among C1, C4, and C5 demonstrated significance (P < .001) for all variables. Post hoc analysis showed significance between C1 and C4, and C1 and C5 for all variables except percentage stance time of the ipsilateral side and percentage single limb support of the contralateral side. CONCLUSIONS: In healthy adults, use of a cane for balance modifies swing and stance parameters of the ipsilateral side and does not affect the base of support formed by the feet. When used for support, the cane alters the swing and stance parameters, and also the base of support formed by the feet.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of using a walking aid on temporal and spatial parameters of gait when used for balance versus support on the dominant and nondominant hand side. DESIGN: Repeated measures observational study design. SETTING: University gymnasium. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-seven healthy male and female adults of mean ± standard deviation age 44.74 ± 10.00 years. METHODS: Five walking conditions (C) were completed by all participants on the GAITRite pressure mat. Normal walking (C1), walking with a cane in the dominant hand (C2) and nondominant hand (C3) as if using for balance, walking with a cane in the dominant hand (C4) and nondominant hand (C5) while allowing approximately 10% of the body weight through the cane. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Temporal measurements (swing time, stance time, single limb support time, double limb support time) as percentage of a gait cycle and the base of support for the left and the right foot for all 5 walking conditions. RESULTS: A significant difference (P < .001) was observed between C1, C2, and C3 in percentage swing time and percentage stance time of the ipsilateral side, and in percentage single limb support time of the contralateral side. The double limb support time was significantly different (P ≤ .04) for both ipsilateral and contralateral sides. Comparisons among C1, C4, and C5 demonstrated significance (P < .001) for all variables. Post hoc analysis showed significance between C1 and C4, and C1 and C5 for all variables except percentage stance time of the ipsilateral side and percentage single limb support of the contralateral side. CONCLUSIONS: In healthy adults, use of a cane for balance modifies swing and stance parameters of the ipsilateral side and does not affect the base of support formed by the feet. When used for support, the cane alters the swing and stance parameters, and also the base of support formed by the feet.