基于速度和耐力的中风后社区行走分类再探:位置在步行成绩衡量中的重要性。

Neurorehabilitation and neural repair Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-30 DOI:10.1177/15459683241257521
Kanika Bansal, Emily J Fox, David Clark, George Fulk, Dorian K Rose
{"title":"基于速度和耐力的中风后社区行走分类再探:位置在步行成绩衡量中的重要性。","authors":"Kanika Bansal, Emily J Fox, David Clark, George Fulk, Dorian K Rose","doi":"10.1177/15459683241257521","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The low-speed groups exhibited fewer home and community steps/day than their medium- and high-speed counterparts (<i>P</i> <i><</i> <i>.05</i>). The low-endurance group took fewer community steps/day than the high-endurance group (<i>P</i> <i><</i> <i>.05</i>). 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.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":94158,"journal":{"name":"Neurorehabilitation and neural repair","volume":" ","pages":"582-594"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Speed- and Endurance-Based Classifications of Community Ambulation Post-Stroke Revisited: The Importance of Location in Walking Performance Measurement.\",\"authors\":\"Kanika Bansal, Emily J Fox, David Clark, George Fulk, Dorian K Rose\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15459683241257521\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The low-speed groups exhibited fewer home and community steps/day than their medium- and high-speed counterparts (<i>P</i> <i><</i> <i>.05</i>). The low-endurance group took fewer community steps/day than the high-endurance group (<i>P</i> <i><</i> <i>.05</i>). 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.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94158,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurorehabilitation and neural repair\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"582-594\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurorehabilitation and neural repair\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15459683241257521\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/30 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurorehabilitation and neural repair","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15459683241257521","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:步态速度或 6 分钟步行测试常用于预测卒中后的社区行走能力,将患者分为家庭行走、有限行走或无限行走。然而,临床评估步态结果的改善是否真正转化为实际社区行走能力的提高仍不确定:本横断面研究旨在探讨中风后社区行走的速度和耐力分类系统在家庭和社区行走方面的差异,并与健康对照组进行比较:方法:60 名中风幸存者和 18 名健康对照者参加了研究。方法:60 名脑卒中幸存者和 18 名健康对照者参加了此次研究。根据速度分类法,脑卒中幸存者被分为低速组、中速组和高速组;根据耐力分类法,脑卒中幸存者被分为低耐力组、中耐力组和高耐力组。使用全球定位系统和加速度计设备对 7 天内的家庭和社区步数进行量化:结果:与中速组和高速组相比,低速组的家庭和社区日步数较少(P .05)。低耐力组比高耐力组每天的社区步数少(P .05)。尽管在步速和耐力的临床测量中存在巨大差异,但中速组/耐力组与高速组/耐力组在家庭和社区步数/天上并无差异。与健康对照组相比,中风幸存者的居家步数/天减少了48%,社区步数/天减少了77%:临床分类系统只能区分居家行走者和社区行走者,但不能区分社区行走的水平,尤其是在步速和耐力超过一定临界值时。由于这些分类系统在现实世界中的应用有限,临床医生在通过临床指标预测社区行走状况时应谨慎行事。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Speed- and Endurance-Based Classifications of Community Ambulation Post-Stroke Revisited: The Importance of Location in Walking Performance Measurement.

Background: 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.

Objective: 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.

Methods: 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.

Results: The low-speed groups exhibited fewer home and community steps/day than their medium- and high-speed counterparts (P<.05). The low-endurance group took fewer community steps/day than the high-endurance group (P<.05). 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.

Conclusions: 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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Reinforcement Learning is Impaired in the Sub-acute Post-stroke Period. Post-Stroke Recovery in Relation to Parvalbumin-Positive Interneurons and Perineuronal Nets. Mapping Trajectories of Gait Recovery in Clinical Stroke Rehabilitation. Exploring Non-invasive Brain Stimulation Effects on Physical Outcomes in People With Parkinson's Disease: An Umbrella Evidence Mapping Review With Meta-analyses. Acute and Longitudinal Effects of Concussion on Reactive Balance in Collegiate Athletes.
×
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