If you don't remember your password, you can reset it by entering your email address and clicking the Reset Password button. You will then receive an email that contains a secure link for resetting your password
If the address matches a valid account an email will be sent to __email__ with instructions for resetting your password
Reprint requests to Herwin Horemans, MSc, Dept of Rehabilitation Medicine, VU University Medical Center, PO Box 7057, 1007 MB Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Horemans HL, Beelen A, Nollet F, Lankhorst GJ. Reproducibility of walking at self-preferred and maximal speed in patients with postpoliomyelitis syndrome.
Objective
To assess the reproducibility of walking performance, heart rate, and perceived exertion at self-preferred speed and maximal walking speed in patients with the postpoliomyelitis syndrome (PPS).
Design
Repeated measurement at a 3-week interval.
Setting
University hospital.
Participants
Convenience sample of 65 patients with PPS.
Interventions
Not applicable.
Main outcome measures
Walking performance: the distance walked in 2 minutes at a self-preferred speed and the time needed to walk 75m at maximal speed, heart rate, and rating of perceived exertion (RPE) on an 11-point scale.
Results
Test-retest reliability of walking performance was excellent for both tests (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] range, .94–.97). No systematic differences existed between test and retest. The smallest detectable change for an individual was 15% for both tests. Test-retest reliability for heart rate was good (ICC=.86) but moderate for RPE (Spearman ρ range, .67–.70). The smallest detectable change for RPE was between 4 and 6 scale points. The variability in walking performance was significantly correlated with the variability in heart rate at self-preferred speed (r=.36, P<.01) but not with the variability in RPE (r=.20, P=.11).
Conclusions
Both walking tests showed good reproducibility and may be appropriate to monitor (individual) changes in walking capacity in patients with PPS. Because of its moderate reproducibility, RPE does not seem to be suitable to monitor physical exertion. The usefulness of an objective measure such as heart rate for this purpose needs further investigation.
In cross-sectional studies of patients with PPS, walking performance has been measured in a laboratory setting for both self-preferred speed and maximal speed.
Whether such tests are appropriate in longitudinal studies, for instance to determine a decline in walking capacity, depends largely on their reproducibility. Although the reproducibility of walking tests at self-preferred and maximal speed is good in patients with respiratory disease,
no data on the reproducibility of the tests are available in patients with PPS.
In addition to walking performance, it may also be relevant to assess physical effort, which relates to the length of time that the activity can be sustained. Physical effort can be measured objectively by recording the heart rate, but also at the level of perception, by rating the perceived exertion (RPE). The RPE has been used to determine exercise levels in PPS patients.
Whether an RPE scale is appropriate for this purpose depends on its stability across measurements and on its relation with the actual effort and performance. Unfortunately, no information exists regarding the reproducibility of the RPE in PPS patients. Further, the literature has revealed inconsistencies about the strength of the relation between the RPE and physiologic criterion measures, such as heart rate.
Knowledge of the reproducibility of RPE and its relation to walking performance and heart rate during walking, may provide supportive evidence for its use to avoid overloading in patients with PPS.
The objective of the present study was to determine the test-retest reproducibility of 2 walking tests with respect to performance and physical effort in patients with PPS. One test measured the distance covered in 2 minutes when walking at a self-preferred speed, and the other test measured the time needed to walk 75m as fast as possible. We also investigated associations between the variability in performance and the variability in physical effort, measured by means of heart rate (only at self-preferred speed) and RPE.
Methods
Participants
Sixty-five subjects with PPS, according to the criteria defined by Halstead,
(ie, new muscle weakness, new muscle fatigue, new muscle pain, or new atrophy) in at least 1 quadriceps, (2) ability to walk for at least 2 minutes, (3) age between 18 and 70 years, and (4) no significant other neurologic disorders. Use of walking aids and orthotic and orthopedic devices was allowed. The Medical Ethics Committee of the hospital approved the study, and all subjects gave written informed consent.
Protocol
Two walking tests were performed on 2 visits that were separated by a 3-week interval. The tests were performed on a closed, marked, 65-m indoor trajectory and were started after the subjects had been sitting on a chair to rest for 5 minutes.
First, subjects walked at a self-preferred walking speed for 2 minutes, and the walking distance was measured. Then, after a 5-minute rest interval, they walked at their maximal walking speed (without running) over a distance of 75m, and the time needed to walk that distance was measured with a stopwatch. They were allowed to use walking aids and devices during the tests as they would when walking outdoors. Heart rate was recorded in both tests. After each walking test, the subjects rated their perceived exertion (RPE) on an 11-point scale deduced from Borg,
ranging from 0 (no exertion) to 10 (maximal exertion). The measurements on the second visit were scheduled at the same time of day as those on the first visit, and subjects walked with the same walking aids and devices on both visits.
Data analysis
The heart rate during walking at self-preferred speed showed a steady state after 60 seconds. Therefore, the mean heart rate between 70 and 100 seconds was calculated and used in the analysis. No heart rate was analyzed for the test at maximum speed because no steady state could be observed.
The test-retest reliability for walking distance, walking time, and heart rate was assessed by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and the 95% confidence interval (CI) of the ICC, by using a random effects 1-way analysis of variance.
The test-retest reliability of RPE was analyzed by calculating the Spearman correlation coefficient.
Systematic differences between visits were tested with the Student t tests for walking distance, walking time, and heart rate, and with the Wilcoxon signed-rank test for RPE. For walking performance and heart rate, agreement of measurements was analyzed according to the Bland-Altman method.
The 95% limits of agreement (LOA) were calculated as mean (visit 2−visit 1)±2 standard deviations (SDs) to determine the smallest change that can be detected within an individual. For the RPE, agreement of measurements was analyzed by calculating the 2.5 and 97.5 percentiles of the difference between the 2 visits.
Associations between walking performance, RPE, and heart rate were determined with respect to differences between visits by calculating the Pearson correlation coefficients. Statistical significance was defined at the P less than .05 level. For statistical analysis SPSS, version 10.0.5,
SPSS Inc, 233 S Wacker Dr, 11th Fl, Chicago, IL 60606.
was used.
Results
Sixty-three subjects (40 women, 23 men) completed the walking tests on both study visits. Heart rate data on 3 subjects were missing because of recording failures.
The mean age of the subjects was 52±7 years. The mean time since the onset of polio was 49±8 years, and the mean time since the onset of symptoms of postpoliomyelitis muscle dysfunction was 10±6 years. Thirty-three patients (52%) wore orthopedic footwear, 14 patients (22%) walked with an ankle-foot or knee-ankle-foot orthosis, and 9 patients (14%) used a cane or crutches. Nineteen patients (30%) did not use any orthopedic devices or walking aids.
Walking at self-preferred speed
According to the ICCs, test-retest reliability was excellent for walking distance and good for heart rate (table 1). Test-retest reliability for RPE was satisfactory (r=.67, P<.01). The mean level of perceived exertion corresponded to “light exertion” (score, 3). There were no systematic differences between visits in walking distance, heart rate, or RPE.
Table 1Results for Walking at Self-Preferred Speed
The mean of the 2 visits against the difference between the 2 visits for walking distance are plotted in figure 1. The LOA represent the smallest change that can be detected within an individual. For walking distance, the LOA were −16.1 (−13.5% of change from the mean) and 18.0m (15.1%); for heart rate, −18 and 14; and for RPE, −5 and 4 scale points (see table 1).
Fig 1Bland-Altman plots for walking (A) at a self-preferred and (B) maximal speed. The solid line represents the mean difference (second visit minus first visit); the dotted lines represent the 95% LOA.
No significant correlation was found between the difference in walking distance at the 2 visits and the difference in RPE (r=.20, P=.11). A weak relation was found between the difference in walking distance and the difference in heart rate (r=.36, P<.01). The difference in heart rate did not correlate with the difference in RPE (r=.14, P=.30).
Walking at maximal speed
The test-retest reliability for walking time and RPE was comparable to that for walking at self-preferred speed (table 2). The level of perceived effort corresponded to “more than average exertion” (score, 6). No systematic differences existed between the 2 visits.
Because there was no particular reason for the outlier that appeared on the scatterplot for walking time (see fig 1), we included the data of this subject in the analysis. The LOA were −8.9 (−14.6% change from mean) and 9.2 seconds (15.2%) for walking time and −6 and 5 for RPE (see table 2). No correlation was found between the difference in walking time and the difference in RPE (r=.01, P=.97).
Discussion
The results showed that the test-retest reliability of walking performance and heart rate was good. The ICCs for walking performance in the present study were comparable to those reported for other populations.
no learning effects were found. Further, the smallest detectable change in walking performance at individual level was better than that obtained by strength measurements using a handheld dynamometer (smallest detectable changes of ≥24%).
Compared with such strength measurements, the walking tests in the present study will detect deterioration in performance more readily and are, therefore, appropriate for comparing conditions at the individual and at the group levels.
It appeared that the smallest detectable change in walking performance was equal for self-preferred and maximal speed. We expected that walking at maximal speed would be less reproducible because it may be more susceptible to differences in motivation,
and patients may not be used to performing activities at maximal speed. On the other hand, variability in maximal walking speed may have been limited by the use of walking aids and orthotic devices and by certain limitations in joint mobility.
Although the reproducibility of walking performance and heart rate were good in the present study, the reproducibility of RPE was moderate. The wide LOA indicate that the individual effort that is perceived during a similar performance under the same circumstances varies considerably. Similar findings have been reported for healthy subjects.
Reproducibility of the blood lactate threshold, 4 mmol.l(-1) marker, heart rate and ratings of perceived exertion during incremental treadmill exercise in humans.
RPE does not seem to be a reliable measure of physical exertion in walking tests in patients with PPS. Although RPE correlates with local muscle fatigue,
To investigate whether the variability of walking performance was related to the variability in heart rate and the variability in RPE, correlations were calculated. As expected, an increase in walking performance was associated with an increase in heart rate. However, a change in walking performance did not correlate with a change in RPE. A reason for this finding may be that limited variation in walking speed is not likely to result in differences in perceived exertion.
A limitation of the analysis of the associations among performance, heart rate, and RPE is that only a part of a full relationship could be investigated. Preferably, these variables should be compared over larger scale ranges by measuring heart rate and RPE at predetermined intervals of walking speed.
Reproducibility of walking at different speeds was good in patients with PPS. Therefore, both walking tests are appropriate to monitor walking performance over time. Because no difference existed in reproducibility between the tests at different speeds, the choice of test must be based on other criteria. Testing at maximal speed might be more sensitive because one may assume that a strength decline in the muscles that are responsible for locomotion will affect walking performance at maximal speed more readily than at self-preferred speed. On the other hand, if the interest is primarily to study changes in actual walking performance, it might be preferable to use the walking test at self-preferred speed because it conforms more to the normal daily situation.
From the moderate reproducibility of RPE at the individual level, we conclude that this is not an appropriate tool to monitor the physical performance of patients with PPS to avoid overload of their physical capacity. Heart rate was a better indicator of physical effort. However, the appropriateness of heart rate as a way to monitor physical effort in patients with PPS must be determined in further studies.
Supplier
References
Lonnberg F.
Late onset polio sequelae in Denmark. Results of a nationwide survey of 3,607 polio survivors.
Reproducibility of the blood lactate threshold, 4 mmol.l(-1) marker, heart rate and ratings of perceived exertion during incremental treadmill exercise in humans.
Supported by the Prinses Beatrix Fonds (grant no. MAR98-0112).
No commercial party having a direct financial interest in the results of the research supporting this article has or will confer a benefit upon the authors(s) or upon any organization with which the author(s) is/are associated.
00646-X&id=gr1.jpg){kind=link}