Skip to main content
Log in

Spatiotemporal gait parameters during dual task walking in need of care elderly and young adults

A cross-sectional study

Raum-Zeit-Gangparameter während Doppelaufgaben bei pflegebedürftigen älteren und jungen Menschen

Eine Querschnittstudie

  • Originalien
  • Published:
Zeitschrift für Gerontologie und Geriatrie Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Up to now there have only been marginal data in the elderly in need of care regarding spatiotemporal gait parameters during single (ST) and dual tasking (DT).

Aim

The aim of this study was to allocate data for gait speed, cadence and stride length cycle variability in the elderly in need of care and in young adults during ST and DT, to compare the two groups and to demonstrate the impact of ST and DT on gait parameters.

Material and methods

This cross-sectional study investigated a group of 16 young healthy adults (mean age 23.0 ± 2.5 years) and a group of 16 elderly persons in need of care (mean age 85.5 ± 0.6 years). The RehaWatch® system was used to collect the spatiotemporal gait parameters cadence, speed and stride length. The participants completed four different measurements during normal walking and fast walking during ST and DT over a walking distance of 20 m. The Wilcoxon rank sum test and Whitney-U test were used for statistical analysis.

Results

Gait speed (ST and DT: p < 0.001), cadence (ST and DT: p < 0.001) and gait variability (ST: p = 0.007, DT: p = 0.003) were significantly reduced in the elderly in need of care group compared to the young group. The gait speed in the elderly in need of care group decreased from normal to fast walking (ST = − 2.8 %, DT = − 12.2 %) compared to the young group (ST = 31.5 %, DT = 25.2 %).

Conclusion

The results of this study are comparable with the results of existing studies, which investigated falling and non-falling participants. Elderly people in need of care cannot increase the normal gait speed.

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund

Bisher gibt es kaum Daten von pflegebedürftigen älteren Menschen bezüglich Gangparameter während Einfach- (EA) und Doppelaufgaben (DA).

Ziel

Das Ziel dieser Studie war es, Gangparameter wie Gehgeschwindigkeit, Kadenz und Gangvariabilität der Doppelschrittlänge bei pflegebedürftigen älteren und jungen gesunden Probanden zu erheben, innerhalb der und zwischen den Gruppen zu vergleichen und die Auswirkungen von EA und DA auf die Gangparameter aufzuzeigen.

Material und Methoden

In dieser Querschnittstudie wurde eine Gruppe von 16 jungen gesunden (23,0 ± 2,5 Jahre) und eine Gruppe von 16 pflegebedürftigen Probanden (85,5 ± 0,6 Jahre) untersucht. Mit Hilfe des RehaWatch®-Systems wurden Gehgeschwindigkeit, Kadenz, und Gangvariabilität der Doppelschrittlänge erhoben. Hierbei wurden 4 verschiedene Messdurchgänge während normalen und schnellen Gehens unter EA und DA auf einer Gehstrecke von 20 m absolviert. Für die statistische Auswertung wurden der Wilcoxon-Rang-Summentest und der Mann-Whitney-U-Test verwendet.

Ergebnisse

Gehgeschwindigkeit (EA und DA: p < 0,001), Kadenz (EA und DA: p < 0,001) und Gangvariabilität der Doppelschrittlänge (EA: p = 0,007, DA: p = 0,003) sind bei der pflegebedürftigen Gruppe signifikant niedriger in der Gruppe der jungen Probanden. Die Gehgeschwindigkeit in der pflegebedürftigen Gruppe reduzierte sich vom normal schnellen zum schnellen Gehen (EA = − 2,8 %, DA = − 12,2 %) im Vergleich zur jungen Gruppe (EA = 31,5 %, DA = 25,2 %).

Schlussfolgerung

Die Ergebnisse dieser Untersuchung sind vergleichbar mit denen früherer Untersuchungen in denen ältere Probanden nach Sturzereignissen und jüngere Probanden untersucht wurden. Pflegebedürftige Ältere können ihre normale Gehgeschwindigkeit nicht mehr steigern.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Reference

  1. Schwenk M, Howe C, Saleh A, Mohler J, Grewal G, Armstrong D, Najafi B (2014) Frailty and technology: a systematic review of gait analysis in those with frailty. Gerontology 60(1):79–89. doi:10.1159/000354211

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Lindenberger U, Marsiske M, Baltes PB (2000) Memorizing while walking: increase in dual-task costs from young adulthood to old age. Psychol Aging 15(3):417–436

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Brauer SG, Woollacott M, Shumway-Cook A (2001) The interacting effects of cognitive demand and recovery of postural stability in balance-impaired elderly persons. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 56(8):M489–496

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Verghese J, Buschke H, Viola L, Katz M, Hall C, Kuslansky G, Lipton R (2002) Validity of divided attention tasks in predicting falls in older individuals: a preliminary study. J Am Geriatr Soc 50(9):1572–1576

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Götz-Neumann K (2011) Gehen verstehen. Ganganalyse in der Physiotherapie. Thieme, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  6. Shumway-Cook A, Woollacott M, Kerns KA, Baldwin M (1997) The effects of two types of cognitive tasks on postural stability in older adults with and without a history of falls. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 52(4):M232–240

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Lord SR, Lloyd DG, Li SK (1996) Sensori-motor function, gait patterns and falls in community-dwelling women. Age Ageing 25 (4):292–299

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Anstey KJ, von Sanden C, Luszcz MA (2006) An 8-year prospective study of the relationship between cognitive performance and falling in very old adults. J Am Geriatr Soc 54(8):1169–1176. doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2006.00813.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Priest AW, Salamon KB, Hollman JH (2008) Age-related differences in dual task walking: a cross sectional study. J Neuroeng Rehabil 5:29. doi:10.1186/1743-0003-5-29

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kressig RW, Beauchet O (2004) Gait analysis and tailored exercise prescription in older adults. Z Gerontol Geriatr 37(1):15–19. doi:10.1007/s00391-004-0205-6

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Schmitt K, Kressig RW (2008) Mobilität und Balance. Therapeutische Umschau 65:421–426

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Montero-Odasso M, Muir SW, Gopaul K, Annweiler C, Beauchet O (2011) Gait velocity versus the timed up and go test: which one to use for the prediction of falls and other adverse health outcomes in primary care?. J Am Geriatr Soc 59(11):2191–2192; author reply 2192–2193. doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2011.03646.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Najafi B, Khan T, Wrobel J (2011) Laboratory in a box: wearable sensors and its advantages for gait analysis. Conference proceedings: annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society Annual Conference 2011:6507–6510. doi:10.1109/IEMBS.2011.6091605

  14. von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP, Iniciativa S (2008) The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Rev Esp Salud Publica 82(3):251–259

    Google Scholar 

  15. Swiss Academy of Medicine (2004) Treatment and care of elderly persons who are in need of care. Swiss Med Wkly 134(41–42):618–626. doi:2004/41/smw-10848

    Google Scholar 

  16. Schwesig R, Leuchte S, Fischer D, Ullmann R, Kluttig A (2011) Inertial sensor based reference gait data for healthy subjects. Gait Posture 33(4):673–678. doi:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2011.02.023

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Schwesig R, Kauert R, Wust S, Becker S, Leuchte S (2010) Reliabilitätsstudie zum Ganganalysesystem RehaWatch. Biomed Tech 55(2):109–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Derlien S, Böhme B, Leistritz L, Smolenski UC (2010) Validitätsuntersuchung zum neuen, innovativen Ganganalysesystem RehaWatch von Hasomed. Man Med 48(4):254–259

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33(1):159–174

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Rogan S, de Bie R, de Bruin ED (2014) Concurrent validity study of the RehaWatch® system during single and dual task walking in elderly with mobility disability. Doctor thesis, Maastricht University and CAPHRI Scholl for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht, The Netherlands

  21. Fried LP, Tangen CM, Walston J, Newman AB, Hirsch C, Gottdiener J, Seeman T, Tracy R, Kop WJ, Burke G, McBurnie MA, Cardiovascular Health Study Collaborative Research Group (2001) Frailty in older adults: evidence for a phenotype. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 56(3):M146–156

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Jansenberger H (2011) Sturzprävention in Therapie und Training. Physiofachbuch. Thieme, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  23. Winter DA, Patla AE, Frank JS, Walt SE (1990) Biomechanical walking pattern changes in the fit and healthy elderly. Phys Ther 70(6):340–347

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Hollman JH, Childs KB, McNeil ML, Mueller AC, Quilter CM, Youdas JW (2010) Number of strides required for reliable measurements of pace, rhythm and variability parameters of gait during normal and dual task walking in older individuals. Gait Posture 32(1):23–28. doi:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2010.02.017

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Gschwind YJ, Bridenbaugh SA (2011) Die Rolle der Ganganalyse. Informierte Arzt 6:39–41

    Google Scholar 

  26. Hausdorff JM, Edelberg HK, Mitchell SL, Goldberger AL, Wei JY (1997) Increased gait unsteadiness in community-dwelling elderly fallers. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 78(3):278–283

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Maki BE (1997) Gait changes in older adults: predictors of falls or indicators of fear. J Am Geriatr Soc 45(3):313–320

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Verghese J, Holtzer R, Lipton RB, Wang C (2009) Quantitative gait markers and incident fall risk in older adults. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 64(8):896–901. doi:10.1093/gerona/glp033

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

The authors thank Bennie Ross for proofreading.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. Rogan.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

S. Agner, J. Bernet, Y. Brülhart, L. Radlinger and S. Rogan state that there are no financial or personal conflicts of interest in relation to this article or any other organizations or people.

All participants in this study provided informed consent. All studies on humans described in this manuscript were carried out with the approval of the local ethics committee of the Canton of Bern (KEK Nr. 147/12) and in accordance with national law and the Helsinki Declaration of 1975 (in its current revised form).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Agner, S., Bernet, J., Brülhart, Y. et al. Spatiotemporal gait parameters during dual task walking in need of care elderly and young adults. Z Gerontol Geriat 48, 740–746 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00391-015-0884-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00391-015-0884-1

Keywords

Schlüsselwörter

Navigation