ABSTRACT
Background: Walking and balance impairment are common sequelae of stroke and significantly impact functional independence, morbidity, and mortality. Adequate postural stability is needed for walking, which requires sufficient integration of sensory information between the visual, somatosensory, and vestibular centers. "Sensory reweighting" describes the normal physiologic response needed to maintain postural stability in the absence of sufficient visual or somatosensory information and is believed to play a critical role in preserving postural stability after stroke. However, the extent to which sensory reweighting successfully maintains postural stability in the chronic stages of stroke and its potential impact on walking function remains understudied. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, fifty-eight community-dwelling ambulatory chronic stroke survivors underwent baseline postural stability testing during quiet stance using the modified Clinical test of Sensory Interaction in Balance (mCTSIB) and assessment of spatiotemporal gait parameters. Results: Seventy-six percent (45/58) of participants showed sufficient sensory reweighting with visual and somatosensory deprivation for maintaining postural stability, albeit with greater postural sway velocity indices than normative data. In contrast, survivors with insufficient reweighting demonstrated markedly slower overground walking speeds, greater spatiotemporal asymmetry, and limited acceleration potential. Conclusion: Adequate sensory system reweighting is essential for chronic stroke survivors' postural stability and walking independence. Greater emphasis should be placed on rehabilitation strategies incorporating multisensory system integration testing and strengthening as part of walking rehabilitation protocols. Given its potential impact on outcomes, walking rehabilitation trials may benefit from incorporating formal postural stability testing in design and group stratification.
ABSTRACT
Importance: For walking rehabilitation after stroke, training intensity and duration are critical dosing parameters that lack optimization. Objective: To assess the optimal training intensity (vigorous vs moderate) and minimum training duration (4, 8, or 12 weeks) needed to maximize immediate improvement in walking capacity in patients with chronic stroke. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter randomized clinical trial using an intent-to-treat analysis was conducted from January 2019 to April 2022 at rehabilitation and exercise research laboratories. Survivors of a single stroke who were aged 40 to 80 years and had persistent walking limitations 6 months or more after the stroke were enrolled. Interventions: Participants were randomized 1:1 to high-intensity interval training (HIIT) or moderate-intensity aerobic training (MAT), each involving 45 minutes of walking practice 3 times per week for 12 weeks. The HIIT protocol used repeated 30-second bursts of walking at maximum safe speed, alternated with 30- to 60-second rest periods, targeting a mean aerobic intensity above 60% of the heart rate reserve (HRR). The MAT protocol used continuous walking with speed adjusted to maintain an initial target of 40% of the HRR, progressing up to 60% of the HRR as tolerated. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was 6-minute walk test distance. Outcomes were assessed by blinded raters after 4, 8, and 12 weeks of training. Results: Of 55 participants (mean [SD] age, 63 [10] years; 36 male [65.5%]), 27 were randomized to HIIT and 28 to MAT. The mean (SD) time since stroke was 2.5 (1.3) years, and mean (SD) 6-minute walk test distance at baseline was 239 (132) m. Participants attended 1675 of 1980 planned treatment visits (84.6%) and 197 of 220 planned testing visits (89.5%). No serious adverse events related to study procedures occurred. Groups had similar 6-minute walk test distance changes after 4 weeks (HIIT, 27 m [95% CI, 6-48 m]; MAT, 12 m [95% CI, -9 to 33 m]; mean difference, 15 m [95% CI, -13 to 42 m]; P = .28), but HIIT elicited greater gains after 8 weeks (58 m [95% CI, 39-76 m] vs 29 m [95% CI, 9-48 m]; mean difference, 29 m [95% CI, 5-54 m]; P = .02) and 12 weeks (71 m [95% CI, 49-94 m] vs 27 m [95% CI, 3-50 m]; mean difference, 44 m [95% CI, 14-74 m]; P = .005) of training; HIIT also showed greater improvements than MAT on some secondary measures of gait speed and fatigue. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings show proof of concept that vigorous training intensity is a critical dosing parameter for walking rehabilitation. In patients with chronic stroke, vigorous walking exercise produced significant and meaningful gains in walking capacity with only 4 weeks of training, but at least 12 weeks were needed to maximize immediate gains. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03760016.
