Panacea Index Logo

Command Palette

Search for a command to run...

Walking training with cueing of cadence improves walking speed and stride length after stroke more than walking training alone: a systematic review.

Journal of physiotherapy
January 1, 2015
Lucas R Nascimento et al. (5 authors)
Comparative StudyJournal ArticleMeta-AnalysisResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tReviewSystematic ReviewHuman Study
Study Details

Study Goal

The researchers aimed to determine whether walking training with cueing of cadence is more effective than walking training alone in improving walking speed, stride length, cadence, and symmetry in stroke survivors.

Results Summary

The meta-analysis found that walking training with cueing of cadence significantly improved walking speed, stride length, cadence, and symmetry compared to walking training alone, with clinically meaningful effect sizes. The evidence supports recommending this intervention for moderately disabled stroke survivors.

Population

Adults who have had a stroke.

Effective Dosage

30 minutes of cueing of cadence, four times a week.

Duration

4 weeks.

Interactions

None mentioned.

Extracted Claims (8)
InterventionDirectionEndpointPopulationDosageImpactClaim #
Walking training with cueing of cadence
increase
walking speed
Adults who have had a stroke
0.23 m/s (95% CI 0.18 to 0.27, I(2)=0%)
improved
#1
Walking training with cueing of cadence
increase
stride length
Adults who have had a stroke
0.21 m (95% CI 0.14 to 0.28, I(2)=18%)
improved
#2
Walking training with cueing of cadence
increase
cadence
Adults who have had a stroke
19 steps/minute (95% CI 14 to 23, I(2)=40%)
improved
#3
Walking training with cueing of cadence
increase
symmetry
Adults who have had a stroke
15% (95% CI 3 to 26, random effects)
improved
#4
Walking training with cueing of cadence
increase
walking speed
moderately disabled individuals with stroke
-
improves
#5
Walking training with cueing of cadence
increase
stride length
moderately disabled individuals with stroke
-
improves
#6
Walking training with cueing of cadence
increase
cadence
moderately disabled individuals with stroke
-
may also produce benefits in terms of
#7
Walking training with cueing of cadence
increase
symmetry of walking
moderately disabled individuals with stroke
-
may also produce benefits in terms of
#8
Abstract

QUESTION: After stroke, is walking training with cueing of cadence superior to walking training alone in improving walking speed, stride length, cadence and symmetry? DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised or controlled trials. PARTICIPANTS: Adults who have had a stroke. INTERVENTION: Walking training with cueing of cadence. OUTCOME MEASURES: Four walking outcomes were of interest: walking speed, stride length, cadence and symmetry. RESULTS: This review included seven trials involving 211 participants. Because one trial caused substantial statistical heterogeneity, meta-analyses were conducted with and without this trial. Walking training with cueing of cadence improved walking speed by 0.23 m/s (95% CI 0.18 to 0.27, I(2)=0%), stride length by 0.21 m (95% CI 0.14 to 0.28, I(2)=18%), cadence by 19 steps/minute (95% CI 14 to 23, I(2)=40%), and symmetry by 15% (95% CI 3 to 26, random effects) more than walking training alone. CONCLUSIONS: This review provides evidence that walking training with cueing of cadence improves walking speed and stride length more than walking training alone. It may also produce benefits in terms of cadence and symmetry of walking. The evidence appears strong enough to recommend the addition of 30 minutes of cueing of cadence to walking training, four times a week for 4 weeks, in order to improve walking in moderately disabled individuals with stroke. REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42013005873).

Medical Subject Headings (MeSH)
AdultCuesDisability EvaluationExercise TherapyFemaleGaitHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicStroke RehabilitationTreatment OutcomeWalking
Study Links
Quality Scores
SafetyNot Assessed
Efficacy85/10
Quality80/10
Citation Metrics
Total Citations69
Citations/Year6.9
Relative Citation Ratio3.84
NIH Percentile89.5%
Research Impact Scores
APT Score0.95
Weight Score1.90
Normalized Score0.70
Related Supplements