Jeanine M Van Ancum1, Kimberley S van Schooten2, Nini H Jonkman3, Bas Huijben4, Rob C van Lummel5, Carel G M Meskers6, Andrea B Maier7, Mirjam Pijnappels8. 1. Department of Human Movement Sciences, @AgeAmsterdam, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, the Netherlands. Electronic address: j.m.van.ancum@vu.nl. 2. Neuroscience Research Australia, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. Electronic address: kim.vanschooten@gmail.com. 3. Department of Human Movement Sciences, @AgeAmsterdam, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, the Netherlands. Electronic address: nini.jonkman@gmail.com. 4. McRoberts, The Hague, the Netherlands. Electronic address: b.huijben@mcroberts.nl. 5. McRoberts, The Hague, the Netherlands. Electronic address: r.vanlummel@mcroberts.nl. 6. Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, de Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Electronic address: c.meskers@vumc.nl. 7. Department of Human Movement Sciences, @AgeAmsterdam, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, the Netherlands; Department of Medicine and Aged Care, @AgeMelbourne, The Royal Melbourne Hospital, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Electronic address: andrea.maier@mh.org.au. 8. Department of Human Movement Sciences, @AgeAmsterdam, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, the Netherlands. Electronic address: m.pijnappels@vu.nl.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Standardized tests of gait speed are regarded as being of clinical value, but they are typically performed under optimal conditions, and may not reflect daily-life gait behavior. The aim of this study was to compare 4-m gait speed to the distribution of daily-life gait speed. STUDY DESIGN: The cross-sectional Grey Power cohort included 254 community-dwelling participants aged 18 years or more. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pearson's correlations were used to compare gait speed assessed using a timed 4-m walk test at preferred pace, and daily-life gait speed obtained from tri-axial lower-back accelerometer data over seven consecutive days. RESULTS: Participants (median age 66.7 years [IQR 59.4-72.5], 65.7% female) had a mean 4-m gait speed of 1.43 m/s (SD 0.21), and a mean 50th percentile of daily-life gait speed of 0.90 m/s (SD 0.23). Ninety-six percent had a bimodal distribution of daily-life gait speed, with a mean 1st peak of 0.61 m/s (SD 0.15) and 2nd peak of 1.26 m/s (SD 0.23). The percentile of the daily-life distribution that corresponded best with the individual 4-m gait speed had a median value of 91.2 (IQR 75.4-98.6). The 4-m gait speed was very weakly correlated to the 1st and 2nd peak (r = 0.005, p = 0.936 and r=0.181, p = 0.004), and the daily-life gait speed percentiles (range: 1st percentile r = 0.076, p = 0.230 to 99th percentile r = 0.399, p < 0.001; 50th percentile r = 0.132, p = 0.036). CONCLUSIONS: The 4-m gait speed is only weakly related to daily-life gait speed. Clinicians and researchers should consider that 4-m gait speed and daily-life gait speed represent two different constructs.
OBJECTIVES: Standardized tests of gait speed are regarded as being of clinical value, but they are typically performed under optimal conditions, and may not reflect daily-life gait behavior. The aim of this study was to compare 4-m gait speed to the distribution of daily-life gait speed. STUDY DESIGN: The cross-sectional Grey Power cohort included 254 community-dwelling participants aged 18 years or more. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pearson's correlations were used to compare gait speed assessed using a timed 4-m walk test at preferred pace, and daily-life gait speed obtained from tri-axial lower-back accelerometer data over seven consecutive days. RESULTS:Participants (median age 66.7 years [IQR 59.4-72.5], 65.7% female) had a mean 4-m gait speed of 1.43 m/s (SD 0.21), and a mean 50th percentile of daily-life gait speed of 0.90 m/s (SD 0.23). Ninety-six percent had a bimodal distribution of daily-life gait speed, with a mean 1st peak of 0.61 m/s (SD 0.15) and 2nd peak of 1.26 m/s (SD 0.23). The percentile of the daily-life distribution that corresponded best with the individual 4-m gait speed had a median value of 91.2 (IQR 75.4-98.6). The 4-m gait speed was very weakly correlated to the 1st and 2nd peak (r = 0.005, p = 0.936 and r=0.181, p = 0.004), and the daily-life gait speed percentiles (range: 1st percentile r = 0.076, p = 0.230 to 99th percentile r = 0.399, p < 0.001; 50th percentile r = 0.132, p = 0.036). CONCLUSIONS: The 4-m gait speed is only weakly related to daily-life gait speed. Clinicians and researchers should consider that 4-m gait speed and daily-life gait speed represent two different constructs.
Authors: Mikaela L Frechette; Brett M Meyer; Lindsey J Tulipani; Reed D Gurchiek; Ryan S McGinnis; Jacob J Sosnoff Journal: Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep Date: 2019-09-04 Impact factor: 5.081
Authors: Benjamin T Davis; Brianna I Bryant; Stacy L Fritz; Reed Handlery; Alicia Flach; Victor A Hirth Journal: Measurement (Lond) Date: 2022-03-31 Impact factor: 5.131
Authors: Yohanna MejiaCruz; Jean Franco; Garret Hainline; Stacy Fritz; Zhaoshuo Jiang; Juan M Caicedo; Benjamin Davis; Victor Hirth Journal: Curr Geriatr Rep Date: 2021-01-20
Authors: Arne Mueller; Holger Alfons Hoefling; Amir Muaremi; Jens Praestgaard; Lorcan C Walsh; Ola Bunte; Roland Martin Huber; Julian Fürmetz; Alexander Martin Keppler; Matthias Schieker; Wolfgang Böcker; Ronenn Roubenoff; Sophie Brachat; Daniel S Rooks; Ieuan Clay Journal: JMIR Mhealth Uhealth Date: 2019-11-27 Impact factor: 4.773
Authors: Carl-Philipp Jansen; Nima Toosizadeh; M Jane Mohler; Bijan Najafi; Christopher Wendel; Michael Schwenk Journal: Eur Rev Aging Phys Act Date: 2019-10-10 Impact factor: 3.878