Panacea Index Logo

Command Palette

Search for a command to run...

Measuring walking-related performance fatigability in clinical practice: a systematic review.

European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine
February 1, 2020
Fanny Van Geel et al. (5 authors)
Journal ArticleSystematic ReviewHuman Study
Study Details

Study Goal

The researchers aimed to review objective clinical measurement methods for assessing walking-related fatigability (WF) across different populations.

Results Summary

The study found that longer walking tests, particularly the six-minute walking test (6MWT), were most commonly used to measure WF by comparing changes between the first and last parts of the test. However, no gold standard exists due to variability in tasks and outcome measures across populations, and psychometric properties require further documentation.

Population

Older adults, multiple sclerosis, spinal muscle atrophy, osteoarthritis, interstitial lung diseases, and myasthenia gravis patients.

Effective Dosage

Not available

Duration

Not specified

Interactions

None mentioned

Extracted Claims (3)
InterventionDirectionEndpointPopulationDosageImpactClaim #
longer walking test
no change
walking-related fatigability (WF)
different populations
-
most often used
#1
six-minute walking test (6MWT)
no change
walking-related fatigability (WF)
different populations
-
preference towards
#2
comparing the changes over the last and first part of the test
no change
walking-related fatigability (WF)
different populations
-
used
#3
Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Fatigability, a change in performance according to tasks and circumstances, can contribute to walking limitations in daily life. Walking-related fatigability (WF) has been assessed subjectively, but current knowledge on best objective measurement methods is limited. The aim of this study was to provide an overview of objective clinical measurement methods assessing WF in different populations. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Articles were searched in Pubmed and Web Of Science by two independent raters. Studies were included when meeting inclusion criteria of measuring WF objectively in a clinical setting, with no exclusion towards any population. Case studies and reviews were not included in the review (systematic review registration number: PROSPERO - CRD42017074121). In total, 28 articles were included. The study populations were older adults (N.=7), multiple sclerosis (N.=14), spinal muscle atrophy (N.=3), osteoarthritis (N.=3), interstitial lung diseases (N.=1), and myasthenia gravis (N.=1). Data about patient characteristics, walking task, WF formula and interpretation (cut-off values and/or psychometric properties) got extracted from included literature. Every included article got checked for quality and risk of bias. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: WF was mostly measured during longer walking test such as six-minute walking test (6MWT) and 500 or 400-m walking test, by comparing the first and last minute or lap for spatiotemporal or kinematic changes in well-defined formulas. No gold standard is however available yet given different tasks or outcome measures across study populations. CONCLUSIONS: Longer walking test were most often used, with a preference towards the 6MWT, thereby comparing the changes over the last and first part of the test. Psychometric properties need more documentation before inclusion as experimental outcome.

Medical Subject Headings (MeSH)
FatigueHumansOutcome and Process Assessment, Health CarePsychometricsWalk TestWalking
Study Links
Quality Scores
SafetyNot Assessed
Efficacy65/10
Quality75/10
Citation Metrics
Total Citations32
Citations/Year6.4
Relative Citation Ratio3.58
NIH Percentile88.3%
Research Impact Scores
APT Score0.95
Weight Score2.42
Normalized Score0.61
Related Supplements
Measuring walking-related performance fatigability in clinic... | Panacea Index