Does Upper Limb Coordination Predict Walking Speed in Older Adults? A Cross-Sectional Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Walking speed is a measure of physical function in older adults. Older adults are sometimes nonambulatory, however, and proxy measures for walking speed may be indicated. Since limb coordination tests can be conducted in non-weight-bearing positions, they may provide that capability. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between timed limb coordination and preferred and maximum walking speed, controlling for other known determinants of walking speed. METHODS: A total of 84 healthy adults (60 women and 24 men) older than 60 years participated. Preferred and maximum walking speed were measured during 10-Meter Walk Tests. Upper limb coordination performance was measured during a timed 5-repetition finger-to-nose test. Other variables measured included isometric knee extension strength, cognition (Montreal Cognitive Assessment), limits of stability (Functional Reach Test), the number of comorbidities (Functional Comorbidity Index), age, height, and sex. Multiple regression and partial correlation analyses (α = .05) were used to identify which variables predicted preferred and maximum walking speed, controlling for all other variables. RESULTS: Participants' mean preferred walking speed was 129 (24) cm·s⁻¹, and mean maximum walking speed was 176 (37) cm·s⁻¹. Finger-to-nose coordination performance, 4.8 (1.3) seconds, correlated negatively with preferred (r = -0.403) and maximum (r = -0.429) walking speed. Those bivariate correlation coefficients, however, were attenuated by other variables in the regression models (partial r = -0.031, P = .786, and partial r = -0.075, P = .513, for preferred and maximum walking speed, respectively). Variance in age, comorbidities, functional reach, knee extension strength, and height accounted for 55.4% of the variance in preferred walking speed. Variance in knee extension strength, cognition, functional reach, age, and comorbidities accounted for 63.5% of the variance in maximum walking speed. After removing knee extension strength and functional reach from the models--those variables that may be difficult or contraindicated to measure in some patient populations--finger-to-nose coordination was not a statistically significant predictor of preferred walking speed. Variance in age, comorbidities, cognition, height, and finger-to-nose coordination accounted for 55.9% of the variance in maximum walking speed. The change in R² attributed to finger-to-nose coordination performance, however, was only 2.9%. DISCUSSION: While knee extension strength, functional reach, comorbidities, and age were most predictive of walking speed, after removing knee extension strength and functional reach from the regression models, finger-to-nose coordination remained a potentially modifiable marker of neuromuscular control that only weakly predicted maximum walking speed in older adults. CONCLUSIONS: The timed finger-to-nose test would not appear to be a valid proxy for walking speed when weight-bearing clinical examination procedures are contraindicated.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».