Randomized trial of treadmill training to improve walking in community-dwelling people after stroke: The AMBULATE trial

Louise Ada, Catherine M. Dean, Richard Lindley

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Background: Residual walking deficits are common in community-dwelling people after stroke. Aims: The aim of this study was to determine if a four-month treadmill and overground walking program is more effective than a two-month program, compared with control, at improving walking in community-dwelling people with stroke who walk slowly. Method: A three-arm randomized trial with concealed allocation, assessor blinding, and intention-to-treat analysis involving 102 people with stroke living in the community who walked slowly was undertaken. Experimental group 1 undertook 30min of treadmill and overground walking thrice per week for four-months, experimental group 2 undertook training for two-months, while the control group had no intervention. The primary outcome was walking measured as the distance covered during the six-min walk test. Other outcomes were walking speed, step length and cadence, health status, community participation, self-efficacy and falls. Results: By two-months, the experimental groups, who were both undergoing training, had improved their six-min walk distance compared with the control group. The four-month training group continued training beyond two-months and improved further so that by four months they walked 38m (95% confidence interval 15-60) more than the control group and 29m (95% confidence interval 4-53) more than the two-month training group. However, by 12 months, well after the cessation of training, both experimental groups had returned to near baseline levels, and there was no difference between the groups. Conclusion: Four months of treadmill training results in better walking. However, these effects disappear once training ceases. Therefore, training should be ongoing.

LanguageEnglish
Pages436-444
Number of pages9
JournalInternational Journal of Stroke
Volume8
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Aug 2013

Fingerprint

Independent Living
Walking
Stroke
Control Groups
Confidence Intervals
Intention to Treat Analysis
Self Efficacy
Health Status

Cite this

@article{9159e7fa404d49eab136cae06894abc8,
title = "Randomized trial of treadmill training to improve walking in community-dwelling people after stroke: The AMBULATE trial",
abstract = "Background: Residual walking deficits are common in community-dwelling people after stroke. Aims: The aim of this study was to determine if a four-month treadmill and overground walking program is more effective than a two-month program, compared with control, at improving walking in community-dwelling people with stroke who walk slowly. Method: A three-arm randomized trial with concealed allocation, assessor blinding, and intention-to-treat analysis involving 102 people with stroke living in the community who walked slowly was undertaken. Experimental group 1 undertook 30min of treadmill and overground walking thrice per week for four-months, experimental group 2 undertook training for two-months, while the control group had no intervention. The primary outcome was walking measured as the distance covered during the six-min walk test. Other outcomes were walking speed, step length and cadence, health status, community participation, self-efficacy and falls. Results: By two-months, the experimental groups, who were both undergoing training, had improved their six-min walk distance compared with the control group. The four-month training group continued training beyond two-months and improved further so that by four months they walked 38m (95{\%} confidence interval 15-60) more than the control group and 29m (95{\%} confidence interval 4-53) more than the two-month training group. However, by 12 months, well after the cessation of training, both experimental groups had returned to near baseline levels, and there was no difference between the groups. Conclusion: Four months of treadmill training results in better walking. However, these effects disappear once training ceases. Therefore, training should be ongoing.",
author = "Louise Ada and Dean, {Catherine M.} and Richard Lindley",
year = "2013",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1111/j.1747-4949.2012.00934.x",
language = "English",
volume = "8",
pages = "436--444",
journal = "International Journal of Stroke",
issn = "1747-4930",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell, Wiley",
number = "6",

}

Randomized trial of treadmill training to improve walking in community-dwelling people after stroke : The AMBULATE trial. / Ada, Louise; Dean, Catherine M.; Lindley, Richard.

In: International Journal of Stroke, Vol. 8, No. 6, 08.2013, p. 436-444.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Randomized trial of treadmill training to improve walking in community-dwelling people after stroke

T2 - International Journal of Stroke

AU - Ada, Louise

AU - Dean, Catherine M.

AU - Lindley, Richard

PY - 2013/8

Y1 - 2013/8

N2 - Background: Residual walking deficits are common in community-dwelling people after stroke. Aims: The aim of this study was to determine if a four-month treadmill and overground walking program is more effective than a two-month program, compared with control, at improving walking in community-dwelling people with stroke who walk slowly. Method: A three-arm randomized trial with concealed allocation, assessor blinding, and intention-to-treat analysis involving 102 people with stroke living in the community who walked slowly was undertaken. Experimental group 1 undertook 30min of treadmill and overground walking thrice per week for four-months, experimental group 2 undertook training for two-months, while the control group had no intervention. The primary outcome was walking measured as the distance covered during the six-min walk test. Other outcomes were walking speed, step length and cadence, health status, community participation, self-efficacy and falls. Results: By two-months, the experimental groups, who were both undergoing training, had improved their six-min walk distance compared with the control group. The four-month training group continued training beyond two-months and improved further so that by four months they walked 38m (95% confidence interval 15-60) more than the control group and 29m (95% confidence interval 4-53) more than the two-month training group. However, by 12 months, well after the cessation of training, both experimental groups had returned to near baseline levels, and there was no difference between the groups. Conclusion: Four months of treadmill training results in better walking. However, these effects disappear once training ceases. Therefore, training should be ongoing.

AB - Background: Residual walking deficits are common in community-dwelling people after stroke. Aims: The aim of this study was to determine if a four-month treadmill and overground walking program is more effective than a two-month program, compared with control, at improving walking in community-dwelling people with stroke who walk slowly. Method: A three-arm randomized trial with concealed allocation, assessor blinding, and intention-to-treat analysis involving 102 people with stroke living in the community who walked slowly was undertaken. Experimental group 1 undertook 30min of treadmill and overground walking thrice per week for four-months, experimental group 2 undertook training for two-months, while the control group had no intervention. The primary outcome was walking measured as the distance covered during the six-min walk test. Other outcomes were walking speed, step length and cadence, health status, community participation, self-efficacy and falls. Results: By two-months, the experimental groups, who were both undergoing training, had improved their six-min walk distance compared with the control group. The four-month training group continued training beyond two-months and improved further so that by four months they walked 38m (95% confidence interval 15-60) more than the control group and 29m (95% confidence interval 4-53) more than the two-month training group. However, by 12 months, well after the cessation of training, both experimental groups had returned to near baseline levels, and there was no difference between the groups. Conclusion: Four months of treadmill training results in better walking. However, these effects disappear once training ceases. Therefore, training should be ongoing.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84879833773&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1747-4949.2012.00934.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1747-4949.2012.00934.x

M3 - Article

VL - 8

SP - 436

EP - 444

JO - International Journal of Stroke

JF - International Journal of Stroke

SN - 1747-4930

IS - 6

ER -