4.3 Article

Arterial Stiffness and Gait Speed in Older Adults With and Without Peripheral Arterial Disease

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HYPERTENSION
Volume 24, Issue 1, Pages 90-95

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/ajh.2010.193

Keywords

aging; arterial stiffness; blood pressure; hypertension; peripheral arterial disease; physical function

Funding

  1. National Institute on Aging (NIA) [N01-AG-6-2101, N01-AG-6-2103, N01-AG-6-2106]
  2. National Institutes of Health, NIA
  3. NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON AGING [ZIAAG007390, ZIAAG000971, N01AG062106, ZIAAG000856, N01AG062101, P30AG024827, N01AG062103] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND Central arterial stiffness is increasingly recognized as an important predictor of cardiovascular events and mortality in older adults; however, few studies have evaluated the association of arterial stiffness with mobility decline, a common consequence of vascular disease. METHODS We analyzed the association of pulse wave velocity (PWV), a measure of aortic stiffness, with longitudinal gait speed over 7 years in 2,172 participants in the Health, Aging and Body Composition (ABC) Study (mean age +/- s.d. 73.6 +/- 2.9 years, 48% men, 39% black). RESULTS In mixed-effects models adjusted for demographics, each s.d. (396 cm/s) higher PWV was associated with 0.015 (s.e. 0.004) m/s slower gait at baseline and throughout the study period in the full cohort (P < 0.001); this relationship was largely explained by hypertension and other vascular risk factors. Among participants with peripheral arterial disease (PAD) (n = 261; 12.7%), each s.d. higher PWV was independently associated with 0.028 (s.e. 0.010) m/s slower gait speed at baseline and throughout the study period (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS These findings suggest that aortic stiffness may be especially detrimental to mobility in older adults with already compromised arterial function.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available