Louis N Awad1, Jacqueline A Palmer1, Ryan T Pohlig2, Stuart A Binder-Macleod3, Darcy S Reisman4. 1. Department of Physical Therapy, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA Graduate Program in Biomechanics and Movement Science, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA. 2. Department of Physical Therapy, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA Delaware Clinical and Translational Research Accel Program, University of Delware, Newark, DE, USA. 3. Department of Physical Therapy, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA Graduate Program in Biomechanics and Movement Science, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA Delaware Clinical and Translational Research Accel Program, University of Delware, Newark, DE, USA. 4. Department of Physical Therapy, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA Graduate Program in Biomechanics and Movement Science, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA dreisman@udel.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A higher energy cost of walking poststroke has been linked to reduced walking performance and reduced participation in the community. OBJECTIVE: To determine the contribution of postintervention improvements in walking speed and spatiotemporal gait asymmetry to the reduction in the energy cost of walking after stroke. METHODS: In all, 42 individuals with chronic hemiparesis (>6 months poststroke) were recruited to participate in 12 weeks of walking rehabilitation. The energy cost of walking, walking speed, and step length, swing time, and stance time asymmetries were calculated pretraining and posttraining. Sequential regression analyses tested the cross-sectional (ie, pretraining) and longitudinal (ie, posttraining changes) relationships between the energy cost of walking versus speed and each measure of asymmetry. RESULTS: Pretraining walking speed (β = -.506) and swing time asymmetry (β = .403) predicted pretraining energy costs: (adj)R(2) = 0.713; F(3, 37) = 34.05; P < .001. In contrast, change in walking speed (β = .340) and change in step length asymmetry (β = .934) predicted change in energy costs with a significant interaction between these independent predictors: (adj)R(2) = 0.699; F(4, 31) = 21.326; P < .001. Moderation by the direction or the magnitude of pretraining asymmetry was not found. CONCLUSIONS: For persons in the chronic phase of stroke recovery, faster and more symmetric walking after intervention appears to be more energetically advantageous than merely walking faster or more symmetrically. This finding has important functional implications, given the relationship between the energy cost of walking and community walking participation.
BACKGROUND: A higher energy cost of walking poststroke has been linked to reduced walking performance and reduced participation in the community. OBJECTIVE: To determine the contribution of postintervention improvements in walking speed and spatiotemporal gait asymmetry to the reduction in the energy cost of walking after stroke. METHODS: In all, 42 individuals with chronic hemiparesis (>6 months poststroke) were recruited to participate in 12 weeks of walking rehabilitation. The energy cost of walking, walking speed, and step length, swing time, and stance time asymmetries were calculated pretraining and posttraining. Sequential regression analyses tested the cross-sectional (ie, pretraining) and longitudinal (ie, posttraining changes) relationships between the energy cost of walking versus speed and each measure of asymmetry. RESULTS: Pretraining walking speed (β = -.506) and swing time asymmetry (β = .403) predicted pretraining energy costs: (adj)R(2) = 0.713; F(3, 37) = 34.05; P < .001. In contrast, change in walking speed (β = .340) and change in step length asymmetry (β = .934) predicted change in energy costs with a significant interaction between these independent predictors: (adj)R(2) = 0.699; F(4, 31) = 21.326; P < .001. Moderation by the direction or the magnitude of pretraining asymmetry was not found. CONCLUSIONS: For persons in the chronic phase of stroke recovery, faster and more symmetric walking after intervention appears to be more energetically advantageous than merely walking faster or more symmetrically. This finding has important functional implications, given the relationship between the energy cost of walking and community walking participation.
Authors: Andreia S P Sousa; Augusta Silva; Rubim Santos; Filipa Sousa; João Manuel R S Tavares Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2013-07-19 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: N E Mayo; S Wood-Dauphinee; S Ahmed; C Gordon; J Higgins; S McEwen; N Salbach Journal: Disabil Rehabil Date: 1999 May-Jun Impact factor: 3.033
Authors: Abigail L Leddy; Mark Connolly; Carey L Holleran; Patrick W Hennessy; Jane Woodward; Ross A Arena; Elliot J Roth; T George Hornby Journal: J Neurol Phys Ther Date: 2016-10 Impact factor: 3.649
Authors: Jaehyun Bae; Louis N Awad; Andrew Long; Kathleen O'Donnell; Katy Hendron; Kenneth G Holt; Terry D Ellis; Conor J Walsh Journal: J Exp Biol Date: 2018-03-07 Impact factor: 3.312
Authors: Katlin Genthe; Christopher Schenck; Steven Eicholtz; Laura Zajac-Cox; Steven Wolf; Trisha M Kesar Journal: Top Stroke Rehabil Date: 2018-02-19 Impact factor: 2.119