Key result
A smartphone-based 6-minute walk test demonstrated high reliability compared to in-clinic ground truth measurements, with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.99 for in-clinic and 0.74 for at-home testing.
Why the study?
The 6-min walk test is a validated proxy for frailty and predictor of clinical outcomes, but implementation challenges limit its widespread use.
Does a smartphone-based at-home 6-min walk test provide reliable measurements compared to in-clinic 6MWT in patients scheduled for cardiac or vascular surgery?
Population
110 patients scheduled for cardiac or vascular surgery at Palo Alto VA Hospital
Comparison
Home-based smartphone 6MWT vs supervised in-clinic 6MWT
Design
Comparative effectiveness study
Follow-up
6 months
Authors
Loading...
May support remote 6MWT monitoring in surgical patients; leaves open prospective outcome validation before practice change.
Observational (n=110)
No
Does a smartphone-based at-home 6-min walk test provide reliable measurements compared to in-clinic 6MWT in patients scheduled for cardiac or vascular surgery?
Effect estimate: Cronbach's alpha 0.99 (in-clinic) and 0.74 (at-home)
A smartphone-based 6-minute walk test demonstrates high reliability compared to in-clinic measurements, offering a feasible at-home functional assessment for cardiovascular patients.
Mak et al. (2021) conducted an observational in Cardiovascular disease (n=110). Smartphone-based 6-min walk test (iPhone and Apple Watch) vs. In-clinic ground truth 6-min walk test was evaluated on Test-retest reliability (Cronbach's alpha) of 6MWT steps (Cronbach's alpha 0.99 (in-clinic) and 0.74 (at-home)). A smartphone-based 6-minute walk test demonstrated high reliability compared to in-clinic ground truth measurements, with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.99 for in-clinic and 0.74 for at-home testing.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: