10 Metre Walk Test: Difference between revisions

No edit summary
mNo edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
<div class="editorbox">
<div class="editorbox">
'''Original Editor '''- [[User:Sinead Greenan|Sinead Greenan]]  
'''Original Editor ''' - [[User:Sinead Greenan|Sinead Greenan]]  


'''Top Contributors''' - {{Special:Contributors/{{FULLPAGENAME}}}}  
'''Top Contributors''' - {{Special:Contributors/{{FULLPAGENAME}}}}  
</div>  
</div>  
== Objective<br> ==
== Objective  ==


The '''10 Metre Walk Test''' is a performance measure used to assess walking speed in metres per second over a short distance. It can be employed to determine functional mobility, gait and vestibular function.<br>  
The '''10 Metre Walk Test''' is a performance measure used to assess walking speed in metres per second over a short distance. It can be employed to determine functional mobility, gait, and vestibular function.<br>  


== Intended Population<br> ==
== Intended Population  ==


Preschool children (2-5 years), children (6-12 years), adolescents (13-17 years), adults (18-64 years), alderly adults (65+) with a range of diagnoses including:&nbsp;
Preschool children (2-5 years), children (6-12 years), adolescents (13-17 years), adults (18-64 years), elderly adults (65+) with a range of diagnoses including:  


*Acquired Brain Injury  
*Acquired Brain Injury  
*Cerebral Palsy
*Geriatrics  
*Geriatrics  
*Hip Fracture  
*Hip Fracture  
Line 30: Line 31:
*A clear pathway with set distance (6, 8, 10 metres in length depending on distance tested)
*A clear pathway with set distance (6, 8, 10 metres in length depending on distance tested)


'''Set Up'''  
'''Set Up''' Measure and mark a 10-metre walkway  
 
Measure and mark a 10-metre walkway  


*Add a mark at 2-metres  
*Add a mark at 2-metres  
Line 50: Line 49:
*<u>Normal comfortable speed</u>: “I will say ready, set, go. When I say go, walk at your normal comfortable speed until I say stop”  
*<u>Normal comfortable speed</u>: “I will say ready, set, go. When I say go, walk at your normal comfortable speed until I say stop”  
*<u>Maximum speed trials</u>: “I will say ready, set, go. When I say go, walk as fast as you safely can until I say stop”<br>
*<u>Maximum speed trials</u>: “I will say ready, set, go. When I say go, walk as fast as you safely can until I say stop”<br>
<references />
== Interpretation of results  ==


== Evidence  ==
== Evidence  ==


=== [http://www.physio-pedia.com/Outcome_Measures Reliability] ===
=== Reliability  ===


The 10 metre walk test has demonstrated excellent reliability in many conditions including health adults, children with neuromuscular disease, Parkinsons, hip fracture, SCI, Strike and TBI:&nbsp;
The 10 metre walk test has demonstrated excellent reliability in many conditions including health adults, children with neuromuscular disease, Parkinson's, hip fracture, SCI, Strike and TBI:  


<u>Test-Retest Reliability</u>
==== Test-Retest Reliability ====


<u></u>'''Children with Neuromuscular Disease:'''<br>(<span style="line-height: 1.5em">n = 29; mean age = 11.5 (3.5) years (6-16), Children with Neuromuscular Disease)</span>
'''Children with Neuromuscular Disease:&nbsp;'''(n = 29; mean age = 11.5 (3.5) years (6-16), Children with Neuromuscular Disease)  


*<u></u><u></u>Excellent test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.91)&nbsp;<ref name="Pirpiris et al">Pirpiris, M., Wilkinson, A., et al. "Walking speed in children and young adults with neuromuscular disease: comparison between two assessment methods." Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics 2003 23(3): 302</ref>
*Excellent test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.91)&nbsp;<ref name="Pirpiris et al">Pirpiris, M., Wilkinson, A., et al. "Walking speed in children and young adults with neuromuscular disease: comparison between two assessment methods." Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics 2003 23(3): 302</ref>


'''Healthy Adults:'''<br>  
'''Healthy Adults:'''<br>  
Line 80: Line 75:


*Excellent test-retest reliability for comfortable gait speed (ICC = 0.96)  
*Excellent test-retest reliability for comfortable gait speed (ICC = 0.96)  
*<ref name="Steffen and Seney">Steffen, T. and Seney, M. "Test-retest reliability and minimal detectable change on balance and ambulation tests, the 36-item short-form health survey, and the unified Parkinson disease rating scale in people with parkinsonism." Physical Therapy 2008 88(6): 733-746</ref>&nbsp;Excellent&nbsp;test-retest reliability for maximum gait speed (ICC = 0.97)
*Excellent&nbsp;test-retest reliability for maximum gait speed (ICC = 0.97)&nbsp;<ref name="Steffen and Seney">Steffen, T. and Seney, M. "Test-retest reliability and minimal detectable change on balance and ambulation tests, the 36-item short-form health survey, and the unified Parkinson disease rating scale in people with parkinsonism." Physical Therapy 2008 88(6): 733-746</ref>


'''SCI:'''<br>  
'''SCI:'''<br>  


*<ref name="Bowden and Behrman">Bowden, M. G. and Behrman, A. L. "Step Activity Monitor: accuracy and test-retest reliability in persons with incomplete spinal cord injury." J Rehabil Res Dev 2007 44(3): 355-362</ref>Excellent test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.97)<br>
*Excellent test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.97)&nbsp;<ref name="Bowden and Behrman">Bowden, M. G. and Behrman, A. L. "Step Activity Monitor: accuracy and test-retest reliability in persons with incomplete spinal cord injury." J Rehabil Res Dev 2007 44(3): 355-362</ref>


*<ref name="Lam et al">Lam, T., Noonan, V., et al. "A systematic review of functional ambulation outcome measures in spinal cord injury." Spinal Cord 2007 46(4): 246-254</ref>Excellent test-retest reliability (r = 0.983)
*Excellent test-retest reliability (r = 0.983)&nbsp;<ref name="Lam et al">Lam, T., Noonan, V., et al. "A systematic review of functional ambulation outcome measures in spinal cord injury." Spinal Cord 2007 46(4): 246-254</ref>


'''Stroke:'''<br>(n = 25; mean age = 72 years; stroke onset = 2 to 6 years, Chronic Stroke)<br>Test-retest assessed three times within a single session:  
'''Stroke:&nbsp;'''<span style="font-size: 13.28px; line-height: 19.92px;">(n = 25; mean age = 72 years; stroke onset = 2 to 6 years, Chronic Stroke)</span><br>Test-retest assessed three times within a single session:  


*<ref name="Collen et al">Collen, F., Wade, D., et al. "Mobility after stroke: reliability of measures of impairment and disability." Disability &amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp; Rehabilitation 1990 12(1): 6-9</ref>&nbsp;Excellent test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.95 to 0.99)<br>
*Excellent test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.95 to 0.99)&nbsp;<ref name="Collen et al">Collen, F., Wade, D., et al. "Mobility after stroke: reliability of measures of impairment and disability." Disability &amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp; Rehabilitation 1990 12(1): 6-9</ref>


*<ref name="Flansbjer et al">Flansbjer, U. B., Holmback, A. M., et al. "Reliability of gait performance tests in men and women with hemiparesis after stroke." J Rehabil Med 2005 37(2): 75-82</ref>&nbsp;Excellent reliability for comfortable (ICC = 0.94) and fast (ICC = 0.97) gait speeds&nbsp;
*Excellent reliability for comfortable (ICC = 0.94) and fast (ICC = 0.97) gait speeds&nbsp;<ref name="Flansbjer et al">Flansbjer, U. B., Holmback, A. M., et al. "Reliability of gait performance tests in men and women with hemiparesis after stroke." J Rehabil Med 2005 37(2): 75-82</ref>


'''TBI:'''<br>  
'''TBI:'''<br>  


*<ref name="van Loo et al">van Loo, M. A., Moseley, A. M., et al. "Test-re-test reliability of walking speed, step length and step width measurement after traumatic brain injury: a pilot study." Brain Inj 2004 18(10): 1041-1048</ref>&nbsp;Excellent between day reliability at comfortable (ICC = 0.95) and fast speeds (ICC = 0.96)<br>
*Excellent between day reliability at comfortable (ICC = 0.95) and fast speeds (ICC = 0.96)&nbsp;<ref name="van Loo et al">van Loo, M. A., Moseley, A. M., et al. "Test-re-test reliability of walking speed, step length and step width measurement after traumatic brain injury: a pilot study." Brain Inj 2004 18(10): 1041-1048</ref>


*<ref name="Watson, M. J">Watson, M. J. "Refining the ten-metre walking test for use with neurologically impaired people." Physiotherapy 2002 88(7): 386-397</ref>&nbsp;Excellent test-retest reliability (r = 0.97 - 0.99)<br>
*Excellent test-retest reliability (r = 0.97 - 0.99)&nbsp;<ref name="Watson, M. J">Watson, M. J. "Refining the ten-metre walking test for use with neurologically impaired people." Physiotherapy 2002 88(7): 386-397</ref>


<u>Interrater/Intrarater Reliability</u>
==== Interrater/Intrarater Reliability ====


<u></u>'''Healthy Adults:'''  
'''Healthy Adults:&nbsp;'''<span style="font-size: 13.28px; line-height: 19.92px;">(n = 28 healthy adults; mean age = 56.43 (+/- 13.82) years)</span>


(n = 28 healthy adults; mean age = 56.43 (13.82) years; Healthy Adults)
*Excellent interrater reliability (ICC = 0.980)&nbsp;<ref name="Wolf et al">Wolf, S. L., Catlin, P. A., et al. "Establishing the reliability and validity of measurements of walking time using the Emory Functional Ambulation Profile." Phys There 1999 79(12): 1122-1133</ref>
 
*Excellent interrater reliability; (ICC = 0.980)&nbsp;<ref name="Wolf et al">Wolf, S. L., Catlin, P. A., et al. "Establishing the reliability and validity of measurements of walking time using the Emory Functional Ambulation Profile." Phys There 1999 79(12): 1122-1133</ref>


'''SCI:'''<br>  
'''SCI:'''<br>  
Line 112: Line 105:
*Excellent intrarater reliability (r = 0.983, p &lt; 0.001)  
*Excellent intrarater reliability (r = 0.983, p &lt; 0.001)  
*Excellent interrater reliability (r = 0.974, p &lt; 0.001)  
*Excellent interrater reliability (r = 0.974, p &lt; 0.001)  
*Bland-Altman plots indicate reliability Excellent when completed in under 40 seconds, but reliability decreases with marginal walkers requiring &gt; 40 seconds to complete&nbsp;<ref name="van Hedel">van Hedel, H. J., Wirz, M., et al. "Assessing walking ability in subjects with spinal cord injury: validity and reliability of 3 walking tests." Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2005 86(2): 190-196</ref>
*Bland-Altman plots indicate reliability as being excellent when completed in under 40 seconds, but reliability decreases with marginal walkers requiring &gt; 40 seconds to complete <ref name="van Hedel">van Hedel, H. J., Wirz, M., et al. "Assessing walking ability in subjects with spinal cord injury: validity and reliability of 3 walking tests." Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2005 86(2): 190-196</ref>
 
*Scivoletto et al 2011 (n = 37; median age = 58.5 (range 19 - 77) years; median time from onset = 24 (range 6 - 109) months; AIS D = 35, C = 2; Median WISCI = 16) utilized 2 methods in chronic SCI (measured 10 m with a static start and measured middle 10 m of 14 m walkway to include acceleration and deceleration), both showing:  
(Scivoletto et al, 2011; n = 37; median age = 58.5 (range 19 - 77) years; median time from onset = 24 (range 6 - 109) months; AIS D = 35, C = 2; Median WISCI = 16, utilized 2 methods, measured 10 m with a static start and measured middle 10 m of 14 m walkway to include acceleration and deceleration, Chronic SCI)<br>For both methods:  
**Excellent interrater reliability (ICC &gt; 0.95)  
 
**Excellent intrarater reliability (ICC &gt; 0.98)&nbsp;<ref name="Scivoletto et al">Scivoletto, G., Tamburella, F., et al. "Validity and reliability of the 10-m walk test and the 6-min walk test in spinal cord injury patients." Spinal Cord 2011 49(6): 736-740.</ref>
*Excellent interrater reliability (ICC &gt; 0.95)  
*Excellent intrarater reliability (ICC &gt; 0.98)&nbsp;<ref name="Scivoletto et al">Scivoletto, G., Tamburella, F., et al. "Validity and reliability of the 10-m walk test and the 6-min walk test in spinal cord injury patients." Spinal Cord 2011 49(6): 736-740.</ref>


'''Stroke:'''<br>  
'''Stroke:'''<br>  


*Excellent intrarater reliability; ICC = 0.87 to 0.88&nbsp;<ref name="Collen et al">Collen, F., Wade, D., et al. "Mobility after stroke: reliability of measures of impairment and disability." Disability &amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp; Rehabilitation 1999 12(1): 6-9</ref>
*Excellent intrarater reliability; ICC = 0.87 to 0.88&nbsp;<ref name="Collen et al">Collen, F., Wade, D., et al. "Mobility after stroke: reliability of measures of impairment and disability." Disability &amp;amp; Rehabilitation 1999 12(1): 6-9</ref>


(Wolf et al, 1999; n = 28 with history of stroke; mean age = 56.04 (12.80) years; mean time since lesion = 13.59 (12.30) months, Chronic Stroke)<br>  
(Wolf et al, 1999; n = 28 with history of stroke; mean age = 56.04 (12.80) years; mean time since lesion = 13.59 (12.30) months, Chronic Stroke)<br>  


*Excellent interrater reliability; (ICC = 0.998)&nbsp;<ref name="Wolf et al">Wolf, S. L., Catlin, P. A., et al. "Establishing the reliability and validity of measurements of walking time using the Emory Functional Ambulation Profile." Phys Ther 1999 79(12): 1122-1133</ref>
*Excellent interrater reliability; (ICC = 0.998) <ref name="Wolf et al">Wolf, S. L., Catlin, P. A., et al. "Establishing the reliability and validity of measurements of walking time using the Emory Functional Ambulation Profile." Phys Ther 1999 79(12): 1122-1133</ref>


'''TBI:'''  
'''TBI:'''  
Line 135: Line 126:
=== Validity  ===
=== Validity  ===


<u>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criterion_validity Criterion Validity]</u>
==== Criterion Validity ====


<u></u>'''Multiple Sclerosis:'''  
'''Multiple Sclerosis:'''  


(Paltamaa et al, 2007; n = 120; mean age = 45.0 (10.8) years; mean duration since symptom onset 12.3 (8.8) years, MS)  
(Paltamaa et al, 2007; n = 120; mean age = 45.0 (10.8) years; mean duration since symptom onset 12.3 (8.8) years, MS)  
Line 154: Line 145:
*Excellent correlation with Barthel Index (r = 0.78
*Excellent correlation with Barthel Index (r = 0.78


<u></u>
==== Construct Validity  ====


<u>[http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/constval.php Construct Validity]</u>
'''Healthy Adults:'''<br>  
 
<u></u>'''Healthy Adults:'''<br>  


*Poor correlation with BBT (r = 0.052)  
*Poor correlation with BBT (r = 0.052)  
Line 174: Line 163:
*Adequate correlation with social role (r = 0.42)&nbsp;<ref name="Latham et al">Latham, N., Mehta, V., et al. "Performance-based or self-report measures of physical function: which should be used in clinical trials of hip fracture patients?" Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation 2008 89(11): 2146-2155</ref>
*Adequate correlation with social role (r = 0.42)&nbsp;<ref name="Latham et al">Latham, N., Mehta, V., et al. "Performance-based or self-report measures of physical function: which should be used in clinical trials of hip fracture patients?" Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation 2008 89(11): 2146-2155</ref>


'''SCI:'''
==== Convergent Validity  ====


Convergent Validity:  
'''SCI:'''<br>


*Excellent correlation between the TUG and 10MWT (r = 0.89, n = 70)  
*Excellent correlation between the TUG and 10MWT (r = 0.89, n = 70)  
Line 185: Line 174:
*Adequate but not significant correlation between WISCI II (0-8,10,11,14,17), dependent walkers (r = -0.35, n = 15)  
*Adequate but not significant correlation between WISCI II (0-8,10,11,14,17), dependent walkers (r = -0.35, n = 15)  
*Adequate correlation between WISCI II (9,12,13,15,16,18-20) independent walkers (r = -0.48, n = 43)  
*Adequate correlation between WISCI II (9,12,13,15,16,18-20) independent walkers (r = -0.48, n = 43)  
*Overall, improved validity in individuals who are less impaired, higher walking ability, and do not require assistance&nbsp;<ref name="van Hedel et al">van Hedel, H. J., Wirz, M., et al. "Assessing walking ability in subjects with spinal cord injury: validity and reliability of 3 walking tests." Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2005 86(2): 190-196</ref>
*Overall, improved validity in individuals who are less impaired, higher walking ability, and do not require assistance <ref name="van Hedel et al">van Hedel, H. J., Wirz, M., et al. "Assessing walking ability in subjects with spinal cord injury: validity and reliability of 3 walking tests." Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2005 86(2): 190-196</ref>


'''Stroke:'''  
'''Stroke:'''  
Line 209: Line 198:
*Small meaningful change = 0.05 m/s  
*Small meaningful change = 0.05 m/s  
*Substantial meaningful change = 0.10 m/s&nbsp;<ref name="Perera et al">Perera, S., Mody, S., et al. "Meaningful change and responsiveness in common physical performance measures in older adults." Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2006 54(5): 743-749</ref>
*Substantial meaningful change = 0.10 m/s&nbsp;<ref name="Perera et al">Perera, S., Mody, S., et al. "Meaningful change and responsiveness in common physical performance measures in older adults." Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2006 54(5): 743-749</ref>
=== Miscellaneous<br>  ===


== Links  ==
== Links  ==
Line 238: Line 225:
== References  ==
== References  ==


<references />  
<references /> <br>  


[[Category:Outcome_Measures]][[Category:Cerebral_Palsy]]
[[Category:Outcome_Measures]] [[Category:Cerebral_Palsy]]

Revision as of 23:00, 15 July 2016

Original Editor - Sinead Greenan

Top Contributors - Kim Jackson, Jo Etherton, Sinead Greenan, Evan Thomas, Admin, Laura Ritchie, Scott Buxton, WikiSysop, Lucinda hampton, Anas Mohamed, Padraig O Beaglaoich, Oyemi Sillo, Lauren Lopez, Manisha Shrestha, 127.0.0.1, Sidra Sayeeda, Naomi O'Reilly and George Prudden

Objective[edit | edit source]

The 10 Metre Walk Test is a performance measure used to assess walking speed in metres per second over a short distance. It can be employed to determine functional mobility, gait, and vestibular function.

Intended Population[edit | edit source]

Preschool children (2-5 years), children (6-12 years), adolescents (13-17 years), adults (18-64 years), elderly adults (65+) with a range of diagnoses including:

  • Acquired Brain Injury
  • Cerebral Palsy
  • Geriatrics
  • Hip Fracture
  • Lower Limb Amputation
  • Movement Disorders
  • Multiple Sclerosis
  • Parkinson’s Disease
  • Spinal Cord Injury
  • Stroke
  • Traumatic Brain Injury

Method of Use[edit | edit source]

Equipment Required

  • Stopwatch
  • A clear pathway with set distance (6, 8, 10 metres in length depending on distance tested)

Set Up Measure and mark a 10-metre walkway

  • Add a mark at 2-metres
  • Add a mark at 8-metres

Instructions

  • The individual walks without assistance for 10 metres, with the time measured for the intermediate 6 metres to allow for acceleration and deceleration
  • Assistive devices may be used, but must be kept consistent and documented for each test
  • Start timing when the toes pass the 2 metre mark
  • Stop timing when the toes pass the 8 metre mark
  • Can be tested at either preferred walking speed or maximum walking speed (ensure to document which was tested)
  • Perform three trials and calculate the average of three trials

Patient Instructions

  • Normal comfortable speed: “I will say ready, set, go. When I say go, walk at your normal comfortable speed until I say stop”
  • Maximum speed trials: “I will say ready, set, go. When I say go, walk as fast as you safely can until I say stop”

Evidence[edit | edit source]

Reliability[edit | edit source]

The 10 metre walk test has demonstrated excellent reliability in many conditions including health adults, children with neuromuscular disease, Parkinson's, hip fracture, SCI, Strike and TBI:

Test-Retest Reliability[edit | edit source]

Children with Neuromuscular Disease: (n = 29; mean age = 11.5 (3.5) years (6-16), Children with Neuromuscular Disease)

  • Excellent test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.91) [1]

Healthy Adults:

  • Excellent test-retest reliability for comfortable gait speed (r = 0.75 - 0.90) [2]
  • Excellent test-retest reliability for comfortable and fastest gait speeds (ICC = 0.93 - 0.91) [3]

Hip Fracture:

  • Excellent test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.823 with 95% CI = 0.565 to 0.934) [4]

Parkinson’s Disease or Parkinsonism:

  • Excellent test-retest reliability for comfortable gait speed (ICC = 0.96)
  • Excellent test-retest reliability for maximum gait speed (ICC = 0.97) [5]

SCI:

  • Excellent test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.97) [6]
  • Excellent test-retest reliability (r = 0.983) [7]

Stroke: (n = 25; mean age = 72 years; stroke onset = 2 to 6 years, Chronic Stroke)
Test-retest assessed three times within a single session:

  • Excellent test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.95 to 0.99) [8]
  • Excellent reliability for comfortable (ICC = 0.94) and fast (ICC = 0.97) gait speeds [9]

TBI:

  • Excellent between day reliability at comfortable (ICC = 0.95) and fast speeds (ICC = 0.96) [10]
  • Excellent test-retest reliability (r = 0.97 - 0.99) [2]

Interrater/Intrarater Reliability[edit | edit source]

Healthy Adults: (n = 28 healthy adults; mean age = 56.43 (+/- 13.82) years)

  • Excellent interrater reliability (ICC = 0.980) [11]

SCI:

  • Excellent intrarater reliability (r = 0.983, p < 0.001)
  • Excellent interrater reliability (r = 0.974, p < 0.001)
  • Bland-Altman plots indicate reliability as being excellent when completed in under 40 seconds, but reliability decreases with marginal walkers requiring > 40 seconds to complete [12]
  • Scivoletto et al 2011 (n = 37; median age = 58.5 (range 19 - 77) years; median time from onset = 24 (range 6 - 109) months; AIS D = 35, C = 2; Median WISCI = 16) utilized 2 methods in chronic SCI (measured 10 m with a static start and measured middle 10 m of 14 m walkway to include acceleration and deceleration), both showing:
    • Excellent interrater reliability (ICC > 0.95)
    • Excellent intrarater reliability (ICC > 0.98) [13]

Stroke:

  • Excellent intrarater reliability; ICC = 0.87 to 0.88 [8]

(Wolf et al, 1999; n = 28 with history of stroke; mean age = 56.04 (12.80) years; mean time since lesion = 13.59 (12.30) months, Chronic Stroke)

  • Excellent interrater reliability; (ICC = 0.998) [11]

TBI:

(Tyson & Connell, 2009; review of seventeen measures; n = 12 mobile TBI patients, TBI)

  • Excellent interrater reliability (ICC = 0.99) [14]

Validity[edit | edit source]

Criterion Validity[edit | edit source]

Multiple Sclerosis:

(Paltamaa et al, 2007; n = 120; mean age = 45.0 (10.8) years; mean duration since symptom onset 12.3 (8.8) years, MS)

Predictive Validity [15]:

  • Excellent correlation with dependence in self-care (r = 0.60 - 0.87) at comfortable speed
  • Adequate to Excellent correlation with dependence in mobility (r = 0.34 - 0.74) at comfortable speed
  • Adequate to excellent correlation with dependence in domestic life (r = 0.34 - 0.81) at comfortable speed

Stroke:
(Tyson & Connell, 2009; n = 40, review article of 17 measures, Stroke)

Predictive Validity [14]:

  • Excellent correlation with dependence in instrumental activities of daily living (r = 0.76)
  • Excellent correlation with Barthel Index (r = 0.78

Construct Validity[edit | edit source]

Healthy Adults:

  • Poor correlation with BBT (r = 0.052)
  • Adequate correlation with FRT (r = 0.307) [11]

Hip Fracture:

  • Excellent correlation with 6MWT (correlation coefficient = 0.82)
  • Adequate correlation with LE strength (r = 0.51)
  • Adequate correlation with LE power (r = 0.58)
  • Poor correlation with hip pain (r = -0.23)
  • Poor correlation with bodily pain (r = 0.30)
  • Poor correlation with vitality (r = 0.26)
  • Adequate correlation with physical role (r = 0.54)
  • Adequate correlation with social role (r = 0.42) [16]

Convergent Validity[edit | edit source]

SCI:

  • Excellent correlation between the TUG and 10MWT (r = 0.89, n = 70)
  • Excellent correlation between 10MWT and 6MWT (ρ = -0.95, n = 62)
  • Subgroup comparisons of WISCI II and 10MWT
  • Excellent correlation between WISCI II and 10MWT when testing individuals with WISCI II scores 11 - 20 (p = -0.68, n = 47)
  • Poor correlation between the WISCI II and 10MWT when testing individuals with WISCI II scores 0 - 10 (r = -0.24, n = 20)
  • Adequate but not significant correlation between WISCI II (0-8,10,11,14,17), dependent walkers (r = -0.35, n = 15)
  • Adequate correlation between WISCI II (9,12,13,15,16,18-20) independent walkers (r = -0.48, n = 43)
  • Overall, improved validity in individuals who are less impaired, higher walking ability, and do not require assistance [17]

Stroke:

  • Excellent correlation between comfortable gait speed and TUG (ICC = -0.84), FGS (ICC = 0.92), Stair climbing ascend (SCas) (ICC = -0.81), Stair climbing descend (SCde) (ICC = -0.82), 6MWT (ICC = 0.89)
  • Excellent correlation between fast gait speed and TUG (ICC = -0.91), CGS (ICC = 0.88), SCas (ICC = -0.84), SCde (ICC = -0.87) and 6MWT (ICC = 0.95) [9]

Responsiveness[edit | edit source]

Geriatrics:

  • Small meaningful change = 0.05 m/s
  • Substantial meaningful change = 0.10 m/s [18]

SCI:

  • Smallest real difference = 0.13 m/s
  • Mean change between 1 and 3 months post injury, effect size = 0.92
  • Mean change between 3 and 6 months post injury, effect size = 0.47 [7]

Stroke:

  • Small meaningful change = 0.05 m/s
  • Substantial meaningful change = 0.10 m/s [18]

Links[edit | edit source]

10-Metre Walk Test

Recent Related Research (from Pubmed)[edit | edit source]

Failed to load RSS feed from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/erss.cgi?rss_guid=1j3KWEMkH0XDzq-3vTLfvBQZkuF9srmfoTE1VyCA45AoEYKQPY|charset=UTF-8|short|max=10: Error parsing XML for RSS

Read 4 Credit[edit | edit source]

Quiz-image.jpg

Would you like to earn certification to prove your knowledge on this topic?

All you need to do is pass the quiz relating to this page in the Physiopedia member area.

Go to quiz

Find out more about a Physiopedia membership

References[edit | edit source]

  1. ↑ Pirpiris, M., Wilkinson, A., et al. "Walking speed in children and young adults with neuromuscular disease: comparison between two assessment methods." Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics 2003 23(3): 302
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 Watson, M. J. "Refining the ten-metre walking test for use with neurologically impaired people." Physiotherapy 2002 88(7): 386-397
  3. ↑ Bohannon, R. W. "Comfortable and maximum walking speed of adults aged 20-79 years: reference values and determinants." Age Ageing 1997 26(1): 15-19
  4. ↑ Hollman, J. H., Beckman, B. A., et al. "Minimum detectable change in gait velocity during acute rehabilitation following hip fracture." J Geriatr Phys There 2008 31(2): 53-56
  5. ↑ Steffen, T. and Seney, M. "Test-retest reliability and minimal detectable change on balance and ambulation tests, the 36-item short-form health survey, and the unified Parkinson disease rating scale in people with parkinsonism." Physical Therapy 2008 88(6): 733-746
  6. ↑ Bowden, M. G. and Behrman, A. L. "Step Activity Monitor: accuracy and test-retest reliability in persons with incomplete spinal cord injury." J Rehabil Res Dev 2007 44(3): 355-362
  7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 Lam, T., Noonan, V., et al. "A systematic review of functional ambulation outcome measures in spinal cord injury." Spinal Cord 2007 46(4): 246-254
  8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 Collen, F., Wade, D., et al. "Mobility after stroke: reliability of measures of impairment and disability." Disability &amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp; Rehabilitation 1990 12(1): 6-9 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "Collen et al" defined multiple times with different content
  9. ↑ 9.0 9.1 Flansbjer, U. B., Holmback, A. M., et al. "Reliability of gait performance tests in men and women with hemiparesis after stroke." J Rehabil Med 2005 37(2): 75-82
  10. ↑ van Loo, M. A., Moseley, A. M., et al. "Test-re-test reliability of walking speed, step length and step width measurement after traumatic brain injury: a pilot study." Brain Inj 2004 18(10): 1041-1048
  11. ↑ 11.0 11.1 11.2 Wolf, S. L., Catlin, P. A., et al. "Establishing the reliability and validity of measurements of walking time using the Emory Functional Ambulation Profile." Phys There 1999 79(12): 1122-1133 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "Wolf et al" defined multiple times with different content Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "Wolf et al" defined multiple times with different content
  12. ↑ van Hedel, H. J., Wirz, M., et al. "Assessing walking ability in subjects with spinal cord injury: validity and reliability of 3 walking tests." Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2005 86(2): 190-196
  13. ↑ Scivoletto, G., Tamburella, F., et al. "Validity and reliability of the 10-m walk test and the 6-min walk test in spinal cord injury patients." Spinal Cord 2011 49(6): 736-740.
  14. ↑ 14.0 14.1 Tyson, S. and Connell, L. "The psychometric properties and clinical utility of measures of walking and mobility in neurological conditions: a systematic review." Clin Rehabil 2009 23(11): 1018-1033
  15. ↑ Paltamaa, J., Sarasoja, T., et al. "Measures of physical functioning predict self-reported performance in self-care, mobility, and domestic life in ambulatory persons with multiple sclerosis." Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation 2007 88(12): 1649-1657
  16. ↑ Latham, N., Mehta, V., et al. "Performance-based or self-report measures of physical function: which should be used in clinical trials of hip fracture patients?" Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation 2008 89(11): 2146-2155
  17. ↑ van Hedel, H. J., Wirz, M., et al. "Assessing walking ability in subjects with spinal cord injury: validity and reliability of 3 walking tests." Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2005 86(2): 190-196
  18. ↑ 18.0 18.1 Perera, S., Mody, S., et al. "Meaningful change and responsiveness in common physical performance measures in older adults." Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2006 54(5): 743-749


Retrieved from "https://www.physio-pedia.com/index.php?title=10_Metre_Walk_Test&oldid=147345"