4.0 Article

Spatiotemporal gait parameters during dual task walking in need of care elderly and young adults A cross-sectional study

Journal

ZEITSCHRIFT FUR GERONTOLOGIE UND GERIATRIE
Volume 48, Issue 8, Pages 740-745

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00391-015-0884-1

Keywords

Attention physiology; Frailty; Gait parameters; Cross-sectional study; Disability evaluation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Up to now there have only been marginal data in the elderly in need of care regarding spatiotemporal gait parameters during single (ST) and dual tasking (DT). The aim of this study was to allocate data for gait speed, cadence and stride length cycle variability in the elderly in need of care and in young adults during ST and DT, to compare the two groups and to demonstrate the impact of ST and DT on gait parameters. This cross-sectional study investigated a group of 16 young healthy adults (mean age 23.0 +/- 2.5 years) and a group of 16 elderly persons in need of care (mean age 85.5 +/- 0.6 years). The RehaWatchA (R) system was used to collect the spatiotemporal gait parameters cadence, speed and stride length. The participants completed four different measurements during normal walking and fast walking during ST and DT over a walking distance of 20 m. The Wilcoxon rank sum test and Whitney-U test were used for statistical analysis. Gait speed (ST and DT: p < 0.001), cadence (ST and DT: p < 0.001) and gait variability (ST: p = 0.007, DT: p = 0.003) were significantly reduced in the elderly in need of care group compared to the young group. The gait speed in the elderly in need of care group decreased from normal to fast walking (ST = -aEuro parts per thousand 2.8 %, DT = -aEuro parts per thousand 12.2 %) compared to the young group (ST = 31.5 %, DT = 25.2 %). The results of this study are comparable with the results of existing studies, which investigated falling and non-falling participants. Elderly people in need of care cannot increase the normal gait speed.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available