Department of Physical Therapy, University of Mount Union, Alliance, OH, USA.
Department of Physical Therapy, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2024 Aug;38(8):582-594. doi: 10.1177/15459683241257521. Epub 2024 May 30.
Gait speed or 6-minute walk test are frequently used to project community ambulation abilities post-stroke by categorizing individuals as household ambulators, limited, or unlimited community ambulators. However, whether improved clinically-assessed gait outcomes truly translate into enhanced real-world community ambulation remains uncertain.
This cross-sectional study aimed to examine differences in home and community ambulation between established categories of speed- and endurance-based classification systems of community ambulation post-stroke and compare these with healthy controls.
Sixty stroke survivors and 18 healthy controls participated. Stroke survivors were categorized into low-speed, medium-speed, or high-speed groups based on speed-based classifications and into low-endurance, medium-endurance, or high-endurance groups based on the endurance-based classification. Home and community steps/day were quantified using Global Positioning System and accelerometer devices over 7 days.
The low-speed groups exhibited fewer home and community steps/day than their medium- and high-speed counterparts ( ). The low-endurance group took fewer community steps/day than the high-endurance group ( ). Despite vast differences in clinical measures of gait speed and endurance, the medium-speed/endurance groups did not differ in their home and community steps/day from the high-speed/endurance groups, respectively. Stroke survivors took 48% fewer home steps/day and 77% fewer community steps/day than healthy controls.
Clinical classification systems may only distinguish home ambulators from community ambulators, but not between levels of community ambulation, especially beyond certain thresholds of gait speed and endurance. Clinicians should use caution when predicting community ambulation status through clinical measures, due to the limited translation of these classification systems into the real world.
步态速度或 6 分钟步行试验常用于通过将个体归类为居家步行者、有限或无限社区步行者来预测卒中后社区步行能力。然而,临床评估的步态改善结果是否真正转化为增强的现实世界社区步行能力仍不确定。
本横断面研究旨在比较基于速度和耐力的社区步行分类系统中确定的分类与健康对照组之间的居家和社区步行差异,并比较这些分类。
共有 60 名卒中幸存者和 18 名健康对照者参与了本研究。根据速度分类,卒中幸存者分为低速、中速或高速组,根据耐力分类,分为低耐力、中耐力或高耐力组。使用全球定位系统和加速度计设备在 7 天内量化居家和社区的步数/天。
低速组的居家和社区步数/天少于中速和高速组(<0.001)。低耐力组的社区步数/天少于高耐力组(<0.001)。尽管在步态速度和耐力的临床测量方面存在巨大差异,但中速/耐力组与高速/耐力组的居家和社区步数/天分别没有差异。卒中幸存者的居家步数/天比健康对照组少 48%,社区步数/天少 77%。
临床分类系统可能只能区分居家步行者和社区步行者,但不能区分社区步行水平,尤其是在步态速度和耐力达到一定阈值之外。由于这些分类系统在现实世界中的转化有限,临床医生在通过临床测量预测社区步行状态时应谨慎。