School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Age Ageing. 2024 Mar 1;53(3). doi: 10.1093/ageing/afae055.
The gait speed test is one of the most widely used mobility assessments for older adults. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate and compare the measurement properties of the usual and fast gait speed tests in community-dwelling older adults.
Three databases were searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL. Peer-reviewed articles evaluating the gait speed test's measurement properties or interpretability in community-dwelling older adults were included. The Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments guidelines were followed for data synthesis and quality assessment.
Ninety-five articles met our inclusion criteria, with 79 evaluating a measurement property and 16 reporting on interpretability. There was sufficient reliability for both tests, with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) generally ranging from 0.72 to 0.98, but overall quality of evidence was low. For convergent/discriminant validity, an overall sufficient rating with moderate quality of evidence was found for both tests. Concurrent validity of the usual gait speed test was sufficient (ICCs = 0.79-0.93 with longer distances) with moderate quality of evidence; however, there were insufficient results for the fast gait speed test (e.g. low agreement with longer distances) supported by high-quality studies. Responsiveness was only evaluated in three articles, with low quality of evidence.
Findings from this review demonstrated evidence in support of the reliability and validity of the usual and fast gait speed tests in community-dwelling older adults. However, future validation studies should employ rigorous methodology and evaluate the tests' responsiveness.
步态速度测试是最常用于评估老年人移动能力的测试之一。我们进行了一项系统评价,以评估和比较社区居住的老年人进行常规步态速度测试和快速步态速度测试的测量特性。
我们检索了三个数据库:MEDLINE、EMBASE 和 CINAHL。纳入了评估步态速度测试在社区居住的老年人中的测量特性或可解释性的同行评审文章。我们遵循共识基础标准选择健康测量仪器指南进行数据综合和质量评估。
95 篇文章符合我们的纳入标准,其中 79 篇评估了测量特性,16 篇报告了可解释性。两种测试的可靠性均足够,组内相关系数(ICC)通常在 0.72 到 0.98 之间,但总体证据质量较低。对于两种测试的收敛/区分效度,总体评价为足够,证据质量为中等。常规步态速度测试的同时效度足够(ICC=0.79-0.93,距离较长),证据质量为中等;然而,快速步态速度测试的结果不足(例如,距离较长时一致性低),这得到了高质量研究的支持。仅有三篇文章评估了反应性,证据质量较低。
本综述的结果表明,常规步态速度测试和快速步态速度测试在社区居住的老年人中具有可靠性和有效性的证据。然而,未来的验证研究应采用严格的方法,并评估这些测试的反应性。