Influence of timing protocols and distance covered on the outcomes of the 10-meter walk test.

Background: The 10-meter walk test (10MWT) is commonly used to reflect a walking speed, health status, and functional ability of many individuals. However, the test is currently applied using various timing protocols and distance covered that may affect data interpretation with a standard value, and comparisons among the studies. Objective: This study investigated the influence of timing protocols and distance covered on the outcomes of the 10MWT in 78 participants who walked at various speeds, including healthy adults (n = 33), healthy elderly (n = 29), and clinical samples with impaired walking ability (walked slower than 0.8 m/s, n = 16). Methods: The participants were timed while they walked (1) over a 10-meter walkway using static and flying starts; and (2) over 4 and 10 meters using a flying start. The comparisons for outcomes of the timing protocols (static and flying starts), and distance covered (4 and 10 meters) for each group of participants was executed using the dependent samples t-test. Results: A walking speed using a static start was slower than that using a flying start approximately 0.05-0.11 m/s for each group (p < 0.001). On the contrary, the outcomes of a flying start over 4 and 10 meters showed no significant differences (p > 0.05). Conclusions: The findings clearly confirmed the influence of timing protocols on the outcomes of the 10MWT in individuals with various walking speeds, and a flying start over 4 meters in the middle of a 10-meter walkway can be applied as an alternative protocol of the 10MWT when area limits.

Ability of sit-to-stand with hands reflects neurological and functional impairments in ambulatory individuals with spinal cord injury.

STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional study. OBJECTIVES: To explore the need of upper limb contribution during sit-to-stand (STS) in ambulatory participants with spinal cord injury (SCI) and compare the lower limb loading during the sit-to-stand (LLL-STS) in those with SCI who performed the task with or without hands as compared to able-bodied individuals. In addition, the study assessed the correlation between the LLL-STS, and sensorimotor scores and functional ability in ambulatory participants with SCI. SETTING: A tertiary rehabilitation center and community hospitals, Thailand. METHODS: Forty-three participants with SCI who could perform STS with or without hands, and 10 able-bodied individuals were interviewed and assessed for their demographics, STS, and LLL-STS ability. Moreover, participants with SCI were assessed for SCI characteristics, sensorimotor scores, and functional ability relating to independent walking. RESULTS: More than half of participants with SCI (58%) performed STS using hands. Their LLL-STS, sensorimotor, and functional ability were significantly lower than those with SCI who performed the task without hands. The LLL-STS of participants with SCI, particularly amount, was significantly associated with their sensorimotor scores and functional ability (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicated that those with marked lower limb muscle weakness and sensory impairments used their hands during STS. As such, the use of the hands during STS can be used as an indicator of neurological and functional impairments in ambulatory individuals with SCI.

Discriminative ability of the three functional tests in independent ambulatory patients with spinal cord injury who walked with and without ambulatory assistive devices.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Many persons with spinal cord injury (SCI) require an ambulatory assistive device (AAD). An effective monitoring method enables the use of an appropriate AAD and promotes levels of independence for patients. This study investigated the discriminative ability of the three-functional tools relating to walking ability, including the 10-meter walk test (10MWT), the five times sit-to-stand test (FTSST), and the timed up and go test (TUGT), in independent ambulatory persons with SCI who walked with walker, crutches, cane, and non-AAD. METHODS: Eighty-five persons with SCI who could perform sit-to-stand and walk independently at least 50 m were cross-sectionally assessed for their functional ability using the 10MWT, FTSST, and TUGT. RESULTS: The findings for persons not using AADs were significantly better than the other groups for every test (P < 0.001). In addition, persons who walked with cane were significantly different from those who used walkers (P < 0.001) but there were no significant differences between persons who used walker and crutches for every test (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: The findings supported the discriminative validity of the tools, allowing them to indicate functional changes in persons with SCI who walk with different AADs. However, the non-significant differences between subjects who used a walker and crutches may relate to the method of subject arrangement and inclusion criteria that recruit subjects with rather good walking capability and lower limb function. The findings may also suggest the use of the sit-to-stand maneuver as a simple screening tool for walking advancement of walker users, pending further investigation.