Effects of Walking with Aids on Walking Speed and Selected Cardiovascular Parameters in Apparently Healthy Elderly Individuals

C. B. Aiyejusunle, A. Akodu, Oluwadamilola Jarinat Giwa
{"title":"Effects of Walking with Aids on Walking Speed and Selected Cardiovascular Parameters in Apparently Healthy Elderly Individuals","authors":"C. B. Aiyejusunle, A. Akodu, Oluwadamilola Jarinat Giwa","doi":"10.5812/MEJRH.62803","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Elderly individuals make up a large part of the population, many of whom use walking aids and also tend to have a higher percentage of cardiovascular complications. There is a need to document the effects of walking with different aids on walking speed and selected cardiovascular parameters. Objectives: Thisstudyaimedatdeterminingandcomparingtheeffectsof walkingwithcane,tripod,andwalkingframeonwalking speed and selected cardiovascular parameters in apparently healthy elderly individuals. Methods: Thirty-five (35) elderly individuals participated in this study. Participants’ systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and heart rate (HR) were measured after ambulation with and without walking aids. Walking speed (WS) was measured as each participant walked at their normal comfortable pace without aid and with 3 walking aids on separate days. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to find a significant difference between variables. Results: Participants’ meanagewas74.89 ± 7.15years. Systolicbloodpressure(SBP)(138.57 ± 16.62mmHg),diastolicbloodpressure (DBP),(80.37 ± 9.57mmHg),andheartrate(HR)(75.51 ± 9.54beats/min)afterwalkingframeambulationwerehigherthanwithcane (132.91 ± 18.97 mmHg; 78.74 ± 8.59 mmHg; 75.37 ± 10.28 beats/min) and tripod (130.40 ± 16.59 mmHg; 77.31 ± 9.13 mmHg; 74.63 ± 9.92beats/min)ambulation,respectively. Walkingspeed(0.58 ± 0.21m/s)withacanewassignificantlyhigher(P=0.001)thanwith frame (0.31 ± 0.12 m/s), and tripod (0.50 ± 0.19 m/s). Conclusions: Walking frame ambulation elicited a higher blood pressure, a higher HR and a slower WS than cane and tripod ambulation, respectively. The participants walked significantly faster with a cane than tripod and walking frame.","PeriodicalId":36354,"journal":{"name":"Middle East Journal of Rehabilitation and Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Middle East Journal of Rehabilitation and Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5812/MEJRH.62803","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Elderly individuals make up a large part of the population, many of whom use walking aids and also tend to have a higher percentage of cardiovascular complications. There is a need to document the effects of walking with different aids on walking speed and selected cardiovascular parameters. Objectives: Thisstudyaimedatdeterminingandcomparingtheeffectsof walkingwithcane,tripod,andwalkingframeonwalking speed and selected cardiovascular parameters in apparently healthy elderly individuals. Methods: Thirty-five (35) elderly individuals participated in this study. Participants’ systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and heart rate (HR) were measured after ambulation with and without walking aids. Walking speed (WS) was measured as each participant walked at their normal comfortable pace without aid and with 3 walking aids on separate days. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to find a significant difference between variables. Results: Participants’ meanagewas74.89 ± 7.15years. Systolicbloodpressure(SBP)(138.57 ± 16.62mmHg),diastolicbloodpressure (DBP),(80.37 ± 9.57mmHg),andheartrate(HR)(75.51 ± 9.54beats/min)afterwalkingframeambulationwerehigherthanwithcane (132.91 ± 18.97 mmHg; 78.74 ± 8.59 mmHg; 75.37 ± 10.28 beats/min) and tripod (130.40 ± 16.59 mmHg; 77.31 ± 9.13 mmHg; 74.63 ± 9.92beats/min)ambulation,respectively. Walkingspeed(0.58 ± 0.21m/s)withacanewassignificantlyhigher(P=0.001)thanwith frame (0.31 ± 0.12 m/s), and tripod (0.50 ± 0.19 m/s). Conclusions: Walking frame ambulation elicited a higher blood pressure, a higher HR and a slower WS than cane and tripod ambulation, respectively. The participants walked significantly faster with a cane than tripod and walking frame.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
辅助行走对表面健康老年人步行速度和某些心血管参数的影响
背景:老年人占人口的很大一部分,他们中的许多人使用助行器,也往往有更高比例的心血管并发症。有必要记录不同辅助工具对步行速度和选定心血管参数的影响。目的:本研究旨在确定并比较拐杖、三脚架和步行架对表面健康老年人步行速度和某些心血管参数的影响。方法:35例老年人参加本研究。在有助行器和没有助行器的情况下,测量参与者的收缩压(SBP)、舒张压(DBP)和心率(HR)。步行速度(WS)是在不同的日子里测量的,即每个参与者在没有辅助和有3个辅助的情况下以正常舒适的速度行走。方差分析(ANOVA)用于发现变量之间的显著差异。结果:参与者的平均年龄为74.89±7.15岁。步行后收缩压(SBP)(138.57±16.62mmHg)、舒张压(DBP)(80.37±9.57mmHg)、心率(HR)(75.51±9.54次/分)均高于步行组(132.91±18.97 mmHg);78.74±8.59 mmHg;75.37±10.28次/分钟)和三脚架(130.40±16.59 mmHg;77.31±9.13 mmHg;74.63±9.92次/分)。行走速度(0.58±0.21m/s)显著高于框架(0.31±0.12 m/s)和三脚架(0.50±0.19 m/s) (P=0.001)。结论:与拐杖和三脚架行走相比,步行架行走分别引起血压升高、HR升高和WS减慢。参与者使用拐杖行走的速度明显快于使用三脚架行走的速度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
37
期刊最新文献
Long COVID Effects on Level of Physical Activity and Health-Related Quality of Life in the Post-Infection Period: A Cross-Sectional Study Structural Equation Model for Nursing’s Spiritual Commitment, Religious Adaptation, and Their Relationship to Quality of Life and Burnout Developing a Structural Model of Reading Comprehension for Third, Fourth, and Fifth-Grade Students in Persian Language Schools of Tehran Based on the Perfetti Theoretical Framework Persian Handwriting Assessment Tool: Reliability in Students with Specific Learning Disorders Effectiveness of DIR/Floor Time Play Therapy in Social Skills and Emotion Regulation of Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1