4.5 Article

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN WALKING FUNCTION AND ONE-LEGGED BICYCLING TEST IN SUBJECTS IN THE LATER STAGE POST-STROKE

Journal

JOURNAL OF REHABILITATION MEDICINE
Volume 40, Issue 9, Pages 721-726

Publisher

FOUNDATION REHABILITATION INFORMATION
DOI: 10.2340/16501977-0242

Keywords

cerebrovascular accident; exercise test; gait; physical therapy; rehabilitation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: The aim of the present study was to examine the correlation between one-legged bicycling and the 6-minute walk test (6MWT) in subjects post-stroke. A further aim was to analyse the relationship between specific stroke impairment and walking endurance. Participants: Thirty-four subjects (mean age 60 (standard deviation (SD) 4.1) years, mean time post-stroke 62 (SD 33) months) with stroke at least 6 months earlier were tested. Methods: Subjects were evaluated using the 6MWT (distance. heart rate, systolic blood pressure), one-legged bicycling (VO(2)peak, maximal workload (Wmax), heart rate, systolic blood pressure, total exercise time), Fugl-Meyer motor function scale for the lower extremity and Berg Balance Scale. Correlational analyses were used to evaluate the relationships between variables. Results: There was a low correlation between 6MWT and VO(2)peak (rs = 0.39) and a moderate correlation with Wmax (rs = 0.64) and total exercise time (rs = 0.58) (p < 0.001) during one-legged bicycling test for the paretic leg. However, no significant correlation was found in the non-paretic leg. Motor function for the lower extremity and Berg Balance Scale showed a high (rs = 0.72) and moderate (rs = 0.68) correlation. respectively. with the 6MWT. Conclusions: The 6MWT is influenced by motor function and balance as well as cardiorespiratory fitness. Heart rate and systolic blood pressure indicate cardiovascular stress, but the 6MWT cannot be used alone to evaluate fitness in subjects with stroke in the later stages.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available