Andrew W Gardner1, Polly S Montgomery2, Ming Wang3, Biyi Shen3. 1. Department of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, Pa; Reynolds Oklahoma Center on Aging, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, Okla. Electronic address: agardner4@pennstatehealth.psu.edu. 2. Department of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, Pa; Reynolds Oklahoma Center on Aging, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, Okla. 3. Department of Public Health Sciences, Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, Pa.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine (a) whether patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) who walked at least 7000 and 10,000 steps/day had better ambulatory function and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) than patients who walked less than 7000 steps/day, and (b) whether differences in ambulatory function and HRQoL in patients grouped according to these daily step count criteria persisted after adjusting for covariates. METHODS: Two hundred forty-eight patients were assessed on their daily ambulatory activity for 1 week with a step activity monitor, and were grouped according to daily step count targets. Patients who took fewer than 7000 steps/day were included in group 1 (n = 153), those who took 7000 to 9999 steps/day were included in group 2 (n = 57), and patients who took at least 10,000 steps/day were included in group 3 (n = 38). Primary outcomes were the 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) and Walking Impairment Questionnaire (WIQ) distance score, which is a disease-specific measurement of HRQoL. Patients were further characterized on demographic variables, comorbid conditions, and cardiovascular risk factors. RESULTS: The groups were significantly different on ankle-brachial index (P = .02), and on the prevalence of hypertension (P = .04), diabetes (P < .01), abdominal obesity (P < .01), arthritis (P = .04), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (P < .01). Thus, these variables served as covariates in adjusted analyses, along with age, weight, and sex. The 6MWD (mean ± standard deviation) was significantly different among the groups in unadjusted (P < .01) and adjusted (P < .01) analyses (group 1, 313 ± 90 m; group 2, 378 ± 84 m; and group 3, 414 ± 77 m), with groups 2 and 3 having a higher 6MWD than group 1 (P < .01). The WIQ distance score was significantly different among the groups in unadjusted (P < .01) and adjusted (P < .01) analyses (group 1, 30 ± 30%; group 2, 45 ± 35%; and group 3, 47 ± 34%), with groups 2 and 3 having higher WIQ distance scores than group 1 (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with PAD who walked more than 7000 and 10,000 steps/day had greater ambulatory function and HRQoL than patients who walked fewer than 7000 steps/day. Second, the greater ambulatory function and HRQoL associated with walking 7000 and 10,000 steps/day persisted after adjusting for covariates. This study provides preliminary evidence that patients with PAD who walk more than 7000 steps/day have better ambulatory function and HRQoL than patients below this threshold.
OBJECTIVE: To determine (a) whether patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) who walked at least 7000 and 10,000 steps/day had better ambulatory function and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) than patients who walked less than 7000 steps/day, and (b) whether differences in ambulatory function and HRQoL in patients grouped according to these daily step count criteria persisted after adjusting for covariates. METHODS: Two hundred forty-eight patients were assessed on their daily ambulatory activity for 1 week with a step activity monitor, and were grouped according to daily step count targets. Patients who took fewer than 7000 steps/day were included in group 1 (n = 153), those who took 7000 to 9999 steps/day were included in group 2 (n = 57), and patients who took at least 10,000 steps/day were included in group 3 (n = 38). Primary outcomes were the 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) and Walking Impairment Questionnaire (WIQ) distance score, which is a disease-specific measurement of HRQoL. Patients were further characterized on demographic variables, comorbid conditions, and cardiovascular risk factors. RESULTS: The groups were significantly different on ankle-brachial index (P = .02), and on the prevalence of hypertension (P = .04), diabetes (P < .01), abdominal obesity (P < .01), arthritis (P = .04), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (P < .01). Thus, these variables served as covariates in adjusted analyses, along with age, weight, and sex. The 6MWD (mean ± standard deviation) was significantly different among the groups in unadjusted (P < .01) and adjusted (P < .01) analyses (group 1, 313 ± 90 m; group 2, 378 ± 84 m; and group 3, 414 ± 77 m), with groups 2 and 3 having a higher 6MWD than group 1 (P < .01). The WIQ distance score was significantly different among the groups in unadjusted (P < .01) and adjusted (P < .01) analyses (group 1, 30 ± 30%; group 2, 45 ± 35%; and group 3, 47 ± 34%), with groups 2 and 3 having higher WIQ distance scores than group 1 (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with PAD who walked more than 7000 and 10,000 steps/day had greater ambulatory function and HRQoL than patients who walked fewer than 7000 steps/day. Second, the greater ambulatory function and HRQoL associated with walking 7000 and 10,000 steps/day persisted after adjusting for covariates. This study provides preliminary evidence that patients with PAD who walk more than 7000 steps/day have better ambulatory function and HRQoL than patients below this threshold.
Authors: João Paulo dos Anjos Souza Barbosa; Rodrigo Antunes Lima; Andrew W Gardner; Mauro Virgílio Gomes de Barros; Nelson Wolosker; Raphael Mendes Ritti-Dias Journal: Angiology Date: 2011-07-06 Impact factor: 3.619
Authors: Victor Aboyans; Michael H Criqui; Pierre Abraham; Matthew A Allison; Mark A Creager; Curt Diehm; F Gerry R Fowkes; William R Hiatt; Björn Jönsson; Philippe Lacroix; Benôit Marin; Mary M McDermott; Lars Norgren; Reena L Pande; Pierre-Marie Preux; H E Jelle Stoffers; Diane Treat-Jacobson Journal: Circulation Date: 2012-11-16 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Carol Ewing Garber; Bryan Blissmer; Michael R Deschenes; Barry A Franklin; Michael J Lamonte; I-Min Lee; David C Nieman; David P Swain Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2011-07 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: William E Kraus; Kenneth E Powell; William L Haskell; Kathleen F Janz; Wayne W Campbell; John M Jakicic; Richard P Troiano; Kyle Sprow; Andrea Torres; Katrina L Piercy Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2019-06 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: William E Kraus; Kathleen F Janz; Kenneth E Powell; Wayne W Campbell; John M Jakicic; Richard P Troiano; Kyle Sprow; Andrea Torres; Katrina L Piercy Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2019-06 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Thomas Yates; Steven M Haffner; Phillip J Schulte; Laine Thomas; Kim M Huffman; Connie W Bales; Robert M Califf; Rury R Holman; John J V McMurray; M Angelyn Bethel; Jaakko Tuomilehto; Melanie J Davies; William E Kraus Journal: Lancet Date: 2013-12-20 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Judith G Regensteiner; William R Hiatt; Joseph R Coll; Michael H Criqui; Diane Treat-Jacobson; Mary M McDermott; Alan T Hirsch Journal: Vasc Med Date: 2008-02 Impact factor: 3.239
Authors: Anne-Louise Ponsonby; Cong Sun; Obioha C Ukoumunne; Angela Pezic; Alison Venn; Jonathan E Shaw; David W Dunstan; Elizabeth L M Barr; Steven N Blair; Jenny Cochrane; Paul Z Zimmet; Terence Dwyer Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2011-05-11 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Andrew W Gardner; Polly S Montgomery; Ming Wang; Biyi Shen; Shangming Zhang; William A Pomilla Journal: J Cardiopulm Rehabil Prev Date: 2022-04-06 Impact factor: 3.646