Methods of 10-Meter Walk Test and Repercussions for Reliability Obtained in Typically Developing Children

Cyntia R J A de Baptista; Amanda M Vicente; Mariana A Souza; Juliana Cardoso; Vanessa M Ramalho; Ana C Mattiello-Sverzut

doi:10.1155/2020/4209812

Methods of 10-Meter Walk Test and Repercussions for Reliability Obtained in Typically Developing Children

Rehabil Res Pract. 2020 Aug 20:2020:4209812. doi: 10.1155/2020/4209812. eCollection 2020.

Authors

Cyntia R J A de Baptista¹, Amanda M Vicente¹, Mariana A Souza², Juliana Cardoso², Vanessa M Ramalho¹, Ana C Mattiello-Sverzut^{1

2}

Affiliations

¹ Department of Health Science, Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto 14049-900, Brazil.
² Rehabilitation and Functional Performance Graduate Program, Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto 14049-900, Brazil.

Abstract

Introduction: Research and clinical settings use the 10-meter walk test (10MWT) to measure locomotor capacity with considerable methodological diversity. Comparison between healthy and disabled children is frequent; however, the reproducibility of 10MWT using different methods is unknown.

Objectives: This study analysed intrasubject, test-retest reliability, and agreement of four methods of 10MWT, exploring the influence of pace, acceleration-deceleration phases, and anthropometric measurements when calculating mean velocity.

Methods: This cross-sectional study evaluated 120 typical children, both sexes, aged 6, 8, 10, and 12 (n = 30 for each age). The mean times and velocities of the path (10 m) and middle path (6 m) obtained at a self-selected and fast pace were analysed. Initial assessment and another after seven days recorded three measurements per method (sV6 = self-selected pace and 6 m; sV10 = self-selected pace and 10 m; fV6 = fast pace and 6 m; fV10 = fast pace and 10 m). Interclass correlation coefficient (ICC), multiple regression, and Snedecor-F test (5% significance level) were used.

Results: The fV10 method had high intrasubject reliability for all tested ages (0.70 < ICC > 0.89); sV10 exhibited high intrasubject reliability for ages 6, 8, and 12 (0.70 < ICC > 0.89) and moderate for age 10 (0.50 < ICC < 0.69).Test-retest reliability at sV6 and fV6 did not reach high ICC in any tested ages. The test-retest reliability at sV10 and fV10 was moderate for ages 6, 8, and 12 (0.50 < ICC > 0.69) and poor for age 10 (0.25 < ICC > 0.49). There was no agreement between methods: sV6 versus sV10 (mean difference = 0.91 m/s; SEM = 0.036); fV6 versus fV10 (mean difference = 1.70; SEM = 0.046). The fV6 method versus fV10 overestimated the velocity (bias = 1.70 m/s).

Conclusions: For typical children, the method that ensured the highest intrasubject reliability used fast pace and 10 m. Moreover, test-retest reliability increased when adopting 10 m at both self-selected and fast pace. The methods were not equivalent but were related, and those that did not compute the entire pathway overestimated the results.