Document Detail


Assessing walking speed in clinical research: a systematic review.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  18462283     Owner:  NLM     Status:  MEDLINE    
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
OBJECTIVE: To provide a systematic review and describe how assessments of walking speed are reported in the health care literature.
METHODS: MEDLINE electronic database and bibliographies of select articles were searched for terms describing walking speed and distances walked. The search was limited to English language journals from 1996 to 2006. The initial title search yielded 793 articles. A review of the abstracts reduced the number to 154 articles. Of these, 108 provided sufficient information for inclusion in the current review.
RESULTS: Of the 108 studies included in the review 61 were descriptive, 39 intervention and 8 randomized controlled trials. Neurological (n=55) and geriatric (n=27) were the two most frequent participant groups in the studies reviewed. Instruction to walk at a usual or normal speed was reported in 55 of the studies, while 31 studies did not describe speed instructions. A static (standing) start was slightly more common than a dynamic (rolling) start (30 vs 26 studies); however, half of the studies did not describe the starting protocol. Walking 10, 6 and 4 m was the most common distances used, and reported in 37, 20 and 11 studies respectively. Only four studies included information on whether verbal encouragement was given during the walking task.
CONCLUSIONS: Tests of walking speed have been used in a wide range of populations. However, methodologies and descriptions of walking tests vary widely from study to study, which makes comparison difficult. There is a need to find consensus for a standardized walking test methodology.
Authors:
James E Graham; Glenn V Ostir; Steven R Fisher; Kenneth J Ottenbacher
Related Documents :
19244363 - Reporting of systematic reviews of micronutrients and health: a critical appraisal.
12127843 - External supports and the prevention of neointima formation in vein grafts.
23915863 - Prenatal diagnosis of proximal femoral focal deficiency: a case report and literature ...
Publication Detail:
Type:  Journal Article; Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural; Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.; Review     Date:  2008-05-02
Journal Detail:
Title:  Journal of evaluation in clinical practice     Volume:  14     ISSN:  1365-2753     ISO Abbreviation:  J Eval Clin Pract     Publication Date:  2008 Aug 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2009-01-07     Completed Date:  2009-04-20     Revised Date:  2014-09-10    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  9609066     Medline TA:  J Eval Clin Pract     Country:  England    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  552-62     Citation Subset:  IM    
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Descriptor/Qualifier:
Biomedical Research / methods*
Disability Evaluation*
Exercise Test
Humans
Research Design
Time Factors
Walking*
Grant Support
ID/Acronym/Agency:
K01 HD046682/HD/NICHD NIH HHS; K01 HD046682-03/HD/NICHD NIH HHS; K01-HD046682/HD/NICHD NIH HHS; K02 AG019736/AG/NIA NIH HHS; K02 AG019736-05/AG/NIA NIH HHS; K02-AG019736/AG/NIA NIH HHS; P30 AG024832/AG/NIA NIH HHS; R01 AG010939/AG/NIA NIH HHS; R01 AG010939-14/AG/NIA NIH HHS; R01 AG017638/AG/NIA NIH HHS; R01 AG017638-07/AG/NIA NIH HHS; R01 AG031178/AG/NIA NIH HHS; R01 AG031178-02/AG/NIA NIH HHS; R01-AG10939/AG/NIA NIH HHS; R01-AG17638/AG/NIA NIH HHS; T32 HD007539/HD/NICHD NIH HHS; T32 HD007539-08/HD/NICHD NIH HHS; T32-HD007539/HD/NICHD NIH HHS
Comments/Corrections

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine


Previous Document:  Pressure ulcer prevalence in intensive care patients: a cross-sectional study.
Next Document:  Achieving changes in practice from national audit: national audit of the organization of services fo...