Key result
200-m fast-walk test elicits ~15% higher cardiac relative intensity vs 6-min walk test in CAD.
Why the study?
Does the 200-m fast-walk test elicit higher cardiorespiratory intensity compared to the 6-min walk test in patients with stable coronary artery disease?
Population
30 patients with stable coronary artery disease, mean age 51.9 +/- 8.7 yrs, referred to the cardiac…
Comparison
200-m fast-walk test vs 6-min walk test and maximal cardiopulmonary…
Design
Cohort, Tests performed in a random order
Follow-up
6 weeks
Authors
Loading...
May offer a higher-intensity option than the 6-min walk test in CAD; leaves open its added value for rehabilitation or outcomes.
RCT (n=30)
Random order
Does the 200-m fast-walk test elicit higher cardiorespiratory intensity compared to the 6-min walk test in patients with stable coronary artery disease?
Absolute Event Rate: 89.6% vs 78.1%
p-value: p=< 0.05
The 200-m fast-walk test elicits higher cardiorespiratory intensity than the 6-min walk test in low-risk CAD patients, making it a useful complement for assessing functional capacity in cardiac rehabilitation.
Grémeaux et al. (2009) conducted an RCT in Stable coronary artery disease (n=30). 200-m fast-walk test vs. 6-min walk test was evaluated on Cardiac relative intensity (% of cardiopulmonary exercise test maximal heart rate) before training (p=< 0.05). The 200-m fast-walk test elicited a higher cardiac relative intensity than the 6-min walk test before (89.6% vs 78.1%; P<0.05) and after (83.8% vs 74.3%; P<0.05) training in CAD patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: