Accelerometric assessment of different dimensions of natural walking during the first year after stroke: Recovery of amount, distribution, quality and speed of walking

  1. Castel Sánchez, M 1
  2. Bussmann, J 2
  3. Janssen, W 2
  4. Horemans, H 2
  5. Chastin, S 3
  6. Heijenbrok, M 4
  7. Stam, H 2
  1. 1 Universidad de Sevilla
    info

    Universidad de Sevilla

    Sevilla, España

    ROR https://ror.org/03yxnpp24

  2. 2 Erasmus University Medical Center
    info

    Erasmus University Medical Center

    Róterdam, Holanda

    ROR https://ror.org/018906e22

  3. 3 Glasgow Caledonian University
    info

    Glasgow Caledonian University

    Glasgow, Reino Unido

    ROR https://ror.org/03dvm1235

  4. 4 Rijndam Rehabilitation Centre, Rotterdam
Mostrar afiliaciones +
Revista:
Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine

ISSN: 1650-1977

Año de publicación: 2015

Volumen: 47

Número: 8

Páginas: 714-721

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.2340/16501977-1994 GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine

Resumen

Objectives: To describe the course of walking behaviour over a period of 1 year after stroke, using accelerometry, and to compare 1-year data with those from a healthy group.Design: One-year follow-up cohort study.Subjects: Twenty-three stroke patients and 20 age-matched healthy subjects.Methods: Accelerometer assessments were made in the participants’ daily environment for 8 h/day during the 1st (T1), 12th (T2) and 48th (T3) weeks after stroke, and at one time-point in healthy subjects. Primary outcomes were: percentage of time walking and upright (amount); mean duration and number of walking periods (distribution); step regularity and gait symmetry (quality); and walking speed.Results: Time walking, time upright, and number of walking bouts increased during T1 and T2 (p < 0.01) and then levelled off (p > 0.30). Mean duration of walking periods showed no significant improvements (p > 0.30) during all phases. Step regularity, gait symmetry and gait speed showed a tendency to increase consistently from T1 to T3. At T3, amount and distribution variables reached the level of the healthy group, but significant differences remained (p < 0.02) in step regularity and gait speed.Conclusion: In this cohort, different outcomes of walking behaviour showed different patterns and levels of recovery, which supports the multi-dimensional character of gait.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • 1. World Health Organization. International classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: ICF. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2001.
  • 2. Rueterbories J, Spaich EG, Larsen B, Andersen OK. Methods for gait event detection and analysis in ambulatory systems. Med Eng Phys 2010; 32: 545–552.
  • 3. Resnick B, Michael K, Shaughnessy M, Nahm ES, Kobunek S, Sorkin J, et al. Inflated perceptions of physical activity after stroke: pairing self-report with physiologic measures. J Phys Act Health 2008; 5: 308–318.
  • 4. Gebruers N, Vanroy C, Truijen S, Engelborghs S, De Deyn PP. Monitoring of physical activity after stroke: a systematic review of accelerometry-based measures. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2010; 91: 288–297.
  • 5. Manns PJ, Baldwin E. Ambulatory activity of stroke survivors: measurement options for dose, intensity, and variability of activity. Stroke 2009; 40: 864–867.
  • 6. van den Berg-Emons RJ, Bussmann JB, Stam HJ. Accelerometry-based activity spectrum in persons with chronic physical conditions. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2010; 91: 1856–1861.
  • 7. Bussmann JB, Tulen JH, van Herel EC, Stam HJ. Quantification of physical activities by means of ambulatory accelerometry: a validation study. Psychophysiology 1998; 35: 488–496.
  • 8. Bussmann JB, van de Laar YM, Neeleman MP, Stam HJ. Ambulatory accelerometry to quantify motor behaviour in patients after failed back surgery: a validation study. Pain 1998; 74: 153–161.
  • 9. Bussmann HB, Reuvekamp PJ, Veltink PH, Martens WL, Stam HJ. Validity and reliability of measurements obtained with an “activity monitor” in people with and without a transtibial amputation. Phys Ther 1998; 78: 989–998.
  • 10. van den Berg-Emons HJ, Bussmann JB, Balk AH, Stam HJ. Validity of ambulatory accelerometry to quantify physical activity in heart failure. Scand J Rehabil Med 2000; 32: 187–192.
  • 11. Prajapati SK, Gage WH, Brooks D, Black SE, McIlroy WE. A novel approach to ambulatory monitoring: investigation into the quantity and control of everyday walking in patients with subacute stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2011; 25: 6–14.
  • 12. Shaughnessy M, Michael KM, Sorkin JD, Macko RF. Steps after stroke: capturing ambulatory recovery. Stroke 2005; 36: 1305–1307.
  • 13. Baert I, Feys H, Daly D, Troosters T, Vanlandewijck Y. Are patients 1 year post-stroke active enough to improve their physical health? Disabil Rehabil 2012; 34: 574–580.
  • 14. Chastin SF, Granat MH. Methods for objective measure, quantification and analysis of sedentary behaviour and inactivity. Gait Posture 2010; 31: 82–86.
  • 15. Lord S, Chastin SF, McInnes L, Little L, Briggs P, Rochester L. Exploring patterns of daily physical and sedentary behaviour in community-dwelling older adults. Age Ageing 2011; 40: 205–210.
  • 16. Frazer SW, Hellebrand WE, Keijsers NL. Variation and achievement of ambulatory activity among patients with chronic stroke. J Rehabil Med 2013; 45: 848–853.
  • 17. Raja B, Neptune RR, Kautz SA. Quantifiable patterns of limb loading and unloading during hemiparetic gait: Relation to kinetic and kinematic parameters. J Rehabil Res Dev 2012; 49: 1293–1304.
  • 18. Lopez-Meyer P, Fulk GD, Sazonov ES. Automatic detection of temporal gait parameters in poststroke individuals. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed 2011; 15: 594–601.
  • 19. Bowden MG, Balasubramanian CK, Behrman AL, Kautz SA. Validation of a speed-based classification system using quantitative measures of walking performance poststroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2008; 22: 672–675.
  • 20. van de Port IG, Kwakkel G, Lindeman E. Community ambulation in patients with chronic stroke: how is it related to gait speed? J Rehabil Med 2008; 40: 23–27.
  • 21. Tieges Z, Mead G, Allerhand M, Duncan F, van Wijck F, Fitzsimons C, et al. Sedentary behavior in the first year after stroke: a longitudinal cohort study with objective measures. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2015; 96: 15–23.
  • 22. Healy GN, Dunstan DW, Salmon J, Cerin E, Shaw JE, Zimmet PZ, et al. Breaks in sedentary time: beneficial associations with metabolic risk. Diabetes Care 2008; 31: 661–666.
  • 23. Mudge S, Barber PA, Stott NS. Circuit-based rehabilitation improves gait endurance but not usual walking activity in chronic stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2009; 90: 1989–1996.
  • 24. Janssen W, Bussmann J, Selles R, Koudstaal P, Ribbers G, Stam H. Recovery of the sit-to-stand movement after stroke: a longitudinal cohort study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2010; 24: 763–769.
  • 25. Bussmann JB, Martens WL, Tulen JH, Schasfoort FC, van den Berg-Emons HJ, Stam HJ. Measuring daily behavior using ambulatory accelerometry: the Activity Monitor. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput 2001; 33: 349–356.
  • 26. Bussmann JBJ. Feasibility of ambulatory measurement of prosthetic gait in the early phase of rehabilitation. Ambulatory monitoring of mobility-related activities in rehabilitation medicine [PhD thesis]. Eburon: Delft, The Netherlands; 2008, p. 171–189.
  • 27. Moe-Nilssen R, Helbostad JL. Estimation of gait cycle characteristics by trunk accelerometry. J Biomech 2004; 37: 121–126.
  • 28. Bussmann JB, van den Berg-Emons HJ, Angulo SM, Stijnen T, Stam HJ. Sensitivity and reproducibility of accelerometry and heart rate in physical strain assessment during prosthetic gait. Eur J Appl Physiol 2004; 91: 71–78.
  • 29. Bussmann JB, Hartgerink I, van der Woude LH, Stam HJ. Measuring physical strain during ambulation with accelerometry. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2000; 32: 1462–1471.
  • 30. Kollen B, van de Port I, Lindeman E, Twisk J, Kwakkel G. Predicting improvement in gait after stroke: a longitudinal prospective study. Stroke 2005; 36: 2676–2680.
  • 31. Askim T, Bernhardt J, Churilov L, Fredriksen KR, Indredavik B. Changes in physical activity and related functional and disability levels in the first six months after stroke: a longitudinal follow-up study. J Rehabil Med 2013; 45: 423–428.
  • 32. Jørgensen HS, Nakayama H, Raaschou HO, Olsen TS. Recovery of walking function in stroke patients: the Copenhagen Stroke Study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1995; 76: 27–32.
  • 33. Kwakkel G, Kollen B, Lindeman E. Understanding the pattern of functional recovery after stroke: facts and theories. Restor Neurol Neurosci 2004; 22: 281–299.
  • 34. West T, Bernhardt J. Physical activity in hospitalised stroke patients. Stroke Res Treat 2012; 2012: 813765.
  • 35. Michael KM, Allen JK, Macko RF. Reduced ambulatory activity after stroke: the role of balance, gait, and cardiovascular fitness. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005; 86: 1552–1556.
  • 36. Patterson KK, Gage WH, Brooks D, Black SE, McIlroy WE. Changes in gait symmetry and velocity after stroke: a cross-sectional study from weeks to years after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2010; 24: 783–790.
  • 37. Michael K, Goldberg AP, Treuth MS, Beans J, Normandt P, Macko RF. Progressive adaptive physical activity in stroke improves balance, gait, and fitness: preliminary results. Top Stroke Rehabil 2009; 16: 133–139.
  • 38. Mudge S, Stott NS. Test–retest reliability of the StepWatch Activity Monitor outputs in individuals with chronic stroke. Clin Rehabil 2008; 22: 871–877.