Nancy G Kutner1, Rebecca Zhang2, Yijian Huang2, Patricia Painter3. 1. USRDS Rehabilitation/Quality of Life Special Studies Center, Emory University, Atlanta, GA; Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, GA. Electronic address: nkutner@emory.edu. 2. USRDS Rehabilitation/Quality of Life Special Studies Center, Emory University, Atlanta, GA; Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA. 3. Department of Physical Therapy, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Slow walk (gait) speed predicts functional decline, institutionalization, and mortality risks in the geriatric population. A gait speed evidence base for dialysis patient outcomes is needed. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 752 prevalent hemodialysis (HD) patients aged 20 to 92 years evaluated in 2009 to 2012 in 7 Atlanta and 7 San Francisco clinics in a US Renal Data System special study. PREDICTOR: Usual walk speed in meters per second, categorized as ≥0.6 m/s (baseline n=575), <0.6 m/s (baseline n=94), and unable to perform walk test (baseline n=83). OUTCOMES: Survival; hospitalization; activities of daily living (ADL) difficulty; 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) Physical Function score. MEASUREMENTS: Cox proportional hazards models investigated gait speed and mortality over a median follow-up of 703 days. Multivariable logistic or linear regression models estimated associations of baseline gait speed with hospitalization, need for ADL assistance, and SF-36 Physical Function score after 12 months. RESULTS: Participants who walked ≥0.6 m/s had 53 (9%) deaths, those who walked <0.6 m/s had 19 (20%) deaths, and those unable to walk had 37 (44%) deaths. Adjusted mortality hazard ratios were 2.17 (95% CI, 1.19-3.98) for participants who walked <0.6 m/s and 6.93 (95% CI, 4.01-11.96) for those unable to walk, compared with participants walking ≥0.6 m/s. After 12 months, compared with baseline walk speed ≥ 1.0 m/s (n=169 participants), baseline walk speed of 0.6 to <0.8 m/s (n=116) was associated with increased odds of hospitalization (OR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.19-3.49) and ADL difficulty (OR, 3.88; 95% CI, 1.46-10.33) and a -8.20 (95% CI, -13.57 to -2.82) estimated change in SF-36 Physical Function score. LIMITATIONS: Cohort not highly representative of overall US in-center HD population. CONCLUSIONS: Because walking challenges the heart, lungs, and circulatory, nervous, and musculoskeletal systems, gait speed provides an informative marker of health status. The association of gait speed with HD patients' risk for functional decline warrants continued study.
BACKGROUND: Slow walk (gait) speed predicts functional decline, institutionalization, and mortality risks in the geriatric population. A gait speed evidence base for dialysis patient outcomes is needed. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 752 prevalent hemodialysis (HD) patients aged 20 to 92 years evaluated in 2009 to 2012 in 7 Atlanta and 7 San Francisco clinics in a US Renal Data System special study. PREDICTOR: Usual walk speed in meters per second, categorized as ≥0.6 m/s (baseline n=575), <0.6 m/s (baseline n=94), and unable to perform walk test (baseline n=83). OUTCOMES: Survival; hospitalization; activities of daily living (ADL) difficulty; 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) Physical Function score. MEASUREMENTS: Cox proportional hazards models investigated gait speed and mortality over a median follow-up of 703 days. Multivariable logistic or linear regression models estimated associations of baseline gait speed with hospitalization, need for ADL assistance, and SF-36 Physical Function score after 12 months. RESULTS:Participants who walked ≥0.6 m/s had 53 (9%) deaths, those who walked <0.6 m/s had 19 (20%) deaths, and those unable to walk had 37 (44%) deaths. Adjusted mortality hazard ratios were 2.17 (95% CI, 1.19-3.98) for participants who walked <0.6 m/s and 6.93 (95% CI, 4.01-11.96) for those unable to walk, compared with participants walking ≥0.6 m/s. After 12 months, compared with baseline walk speed ≥ 1.0 m/s (n=169 participants), baseline walk speed of 0.6 to <0.8 m/s (n=116) was associated with increased odds of hospitalization (OR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.19-3.49) and ADL difficulty (OR, 3.88; 95% CI, 1.46-10.33) and a -8.20 (95% CI, -13.57 to -2.82) estimated change in SF-36 Physical Function score. LIMITATIONS: Cohort not highly representative of overall US in-center HD population. CONCLUSIONS: Because walking challenges the heart, lungs, and circulatory, nervous, and musculoskeletal systems, gait speed provides an informative marker of health status. The association of gait speed with HDpatients' risk for functional decline warrants continued study.
Authors: J M Guralnik; L Ferrucci; C F Pieper; S G Leveille; K S Markides; G V Ostir; S Studenski; L F Berkman; R B Wallace Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2000-04 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Kirsten L Johansen; Tiffany Shubert; Julie Doyle; Brian Soher; Giorgos K Sakkas; Jane A Kent-Braun Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: L P Fried; N O Borhani; P Enright; C D Furberg; J M Gardin; R A Kronmal; L H Kuller; T A Manolio; M B Mittelmark; A Newman Journal: Ann Epidemiol Date: 1991-02 Impact factor: 3.797
Authors: D M Buchner; M C Hornbrook; N G Kutner; M E Tinetti; M G Ory; C D Mulrow; K B Schechtman; M B Gerety; M A Fiatarone; S L Wolf Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 1993-03 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Piyawan Kittiskulnam; Glenn M Chertow; Juan J Carrero; Cynthia Delgado; George A Kaysen; Kirsten L Johansen Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2017-03-17 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: Kathryn E Callahan; Malaz Boustani; Lauren Ferrante; Daniel E Forman; Jerry Gurwitz; Kevin P High; Frances McFarland; Thomas Robinson; Stephanie Studenski; Mia Yang; Kenneth E Schmader Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2020-10-16 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Elizabeth C Lorenz; LaTonya J Hickson; Renee M Weatherly; Karin L Thompson; Heidi A Walker; Judy M Rasmussen; Tara L Stewart; James K Garrett; Hatem Amer; Cassie C Kennedy Journal: Clin Transplant Date: 2020-07-24 Impact factor: 2.863
Authors: Michael A Dunn; Deborah A Josbeno; Amit D Tevar; Vikrant Rachakonda; Swaytha R Ganesh; Amy R Schmotzer; Elizabeth A Kallenborn; Jaideep Behari; Douglas P Landsittel; Andrea F DiMartini; Anthony Delitto Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2016-08-30 Impact factor: 10.864