3.8 Article

Japanese elderly persons walk faster than non-Asian elderly persons: a meta-regression analysis

Journal

JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL THERAPY SCIENCE
Volume 27, Issue 11, Pages 3481-3485

Publisher

SOC PHYSICAL THERAPY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1589/jpts.27.3481

Keywords

Meta-regression analysis; Walking speed; Ethnicity

Categories

Funding

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan [25870703]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [25870703] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

[Purpose] The purpose of this study was to clarify ethnic differences in walking speed by comparing walking speed in both Japanese and non-Asian elderly individuals and to investigate the necessity of consideration of ethnic differences in walking speed. [Subjects and Methods] Articles that reported comfortable walking speeds for community-dwelling elderly individuals were identified from electronic databases. Articles that involved community-dwelling individuals who were 60 years old or older and well functioning were included in the study. Articles that involved Asians were excluded. Weighted means for 5-m walking times were calculated as walking speeds from the Japanese and non-Asian sample data. The effects of age, gender, and ethnicity on 5-m walking times were then investigated using meta-regression analysis. [Results] Twenty studies (34 groups) were included for Japanese, and 16 studies (28 groups) were included for non-Asians. The weighted mean 5-m walking time was estimated to be 4.15 sec (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.87-4.44) for Japanese and 4.24 sec (95% CI: 4.09-4.40) for non-Asians. Furthermore, using meta-regression analysis adjusted for age and gender, the 5-m walking time was 0.40 sec faster (95% CI: 0.03-0.77) for Japanese than for non-Asian elderly individuals. [Conclusion] Walking speed appeared faster for Japanese community-dwelling elderly individuals than for non-Asian elderly individuals.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available