Department of Physical Therapy, School of Health Professions, New York Institute of Technology, Old Westbury, NY 11568, USA.
J Geriatr Phys Ther. 2013 Apr-Jun;36(2):68-73. doi: 10.1519/JPT.0b013e318264b5e8.
The Six-Minute Walk Test (6MWT) is commonly used to assess the fitness level of healthy adults and of older adults with disabilities. It can also be used as an intervention to increase walking endurance. However, its use may be limited in certain rehabilitation settings due to space requirements. If it can be shown that the measured linear distance walked in the 6-minute walk is comparable to the distance walked as measured by a pedometer, the test may be more widely used in a variety of rehabilitation settings. In addition, questions exist as to whether the method of instruction ("walk as far as you can" vs "walk as fast as you can") can impact the rate of perceived exertion of the person performing the test. The purposes of this study were to assess for differences in the measured linear distance and from the gender-based predicted value when compared to the pedometer measurement. In addition, we assessed the difference, if any, in the rate of perceived exertion (RPE) using the 2 different methods of administration. Furthermore, the distance in meters walked using the 2 different methods of instruction was compared; likewise, comparisons were made of these values to predicted values.
A group of 26 older adults participated in this descriptive study. After a practice trial, each person completed 2 linear trials using different methods of instruction, ("walk as fast as you can" or "walk as far as you can") of the 6MWT while wearing a DIGI-WALKER SW-651 pedometer. Vital signs were taken before and after each trial. Linear distance, pedometer distance, and numeric value RPE were recorded.
Paired t tests demonstrated no gender differences. An intraclass correlation coefficient (2,1) of 0.822 was calculated between all dependent variables. A repeated measures MANOVA was conducted to assess for differences between all variables resulting in no differences (F = 1.98; P = .13). Pairwise comparisons were also insignificant for the distance measurements except predicted value and pedometer fast P = .024. Paired t tests also demonstrated differences between RPE between trials (t = 2.15; P = .041).
There was good agreement between these distance measures for the 6MWT. The use of a pedometer was found to be a valid measure of walking distance during the 6MWT. It was also found that the method of instruction made no differences in walking distance. Although the change was minimal on the Borg scale, the RPE was found to be significantly different between far and fast trials in healthy adults. From this study, it appears that that either mode of instruction is valid in healthy community-dwelling populations. Future studies should include populations with impairments.
六分钟步行测试（6MWT）常用于评估健康成年人和残疾老年人的体能水平。它也可以作为一种干预措施来提高步行耐力。然而，由于空间要求，其在某些康复环境中的使用可能会受到限制。如果可以证明 6 分钟步行测试中测量的线性距离与计步器测量的距离相当，那么该测试可能会在各种康复环境中得到更广泛的应用。此外，关于指示方法（“尽可能远地走”与“尽可能快地走”）是否会影响进行测试的人的感知用力程度，存在疑问。本研究的目的是评估与计步器测量值相比，测量的线性距离和基于性别的预测值是否存在差异。此外，我们还评估了使用两种不同指示方法的感知用力程度（RPE）的差异（如果有）。此外，还比较了使用两种不同指示方法的行走距离（米），并将这些值与预测值进行了比较。
一组 26 名老年人参与了这项描述性研究。在进行了一次练习试验后，每个人都穿着 DIGI-WALKER SW-651 计步器，使用两种不同的指示方法（“尽可能快地走”或“尽可能远地走”）完成了 2 次线性试验。在每次试验前后都测量了生命体征。记录线性距离、计步器距离和数字 RPE 值。
配对 t 检验表明没有性别差异。所有因变量之间的组内相关系数（2,1）为 0.822。进行重复测量的方差分析以评估所有变量之间的差异，结果无差异（F = 1.98；P =.13）。距离测量的成对比较除了预测值和计步器快速之间的差异（P =.024）外，其他差异均无统计学意义。配对 t 检验还表明，两次试验之间的 RPE 存在差异（t = 2.15；P =.041）。
6MWT 中这些距离测量值之间具有良好的一致性。使用计步器是 6MWT 中测量步行距离的有效方法。还发现，指示方法在步行距离上没有差异。尽管在 Borg 量表上的变化很小，但在健康成年人中，远走和快走试验之间的 RPE 存在显著差异。从这项研究中可以看出，在健康的社区居住人群中，两种指导模式都是有效的。未来的研究应该包括有障碍的人群。
