Key result
Two-minute walk test accurately identifies functional capacity in cardiac patients with ~0.90 AUC.
Why the study?
The relationship between the 2-Minute Walk Test and clinical parameters such as ejection fraction and age, as well as its diagnostic performance compared to the 6-Minute Walk Test, remains unclear.
Does the 2-Minute Walk Test provide comparable diagnostic performance to the 6-Minute Walk Test for assessing functional capacity in cardiac patients?
Cross-Sectional (n=180)
Does the 2-Minute Walk Test provide comparable diagnostic performance to the 6-Minute Walk Test for assessing functional capacity in cardiac patients?
Effect estimate: AUC 0.898
The 2-Minute Walk Test demonstrates excellent diagnostic accuracy compared to the 6-Minute Walk Test and may serve as a simpler, practical alternative for assessing functional capacity in cardiac patients.
2MWT associations with EF and age remain unclear; leaves open its diagnostic role pending prospective validation.
Background and Aims Functional capacity is an important clinical indicator in cardiovascular disease. The 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT) is widely used, while the 2-Minute Walk Test (2MWT) has emerged as a simpler alternative. Its relationship with clinical parameters and diagnostic performance remains unclear. To evaluate the association of 6MWT and 2MWT with ejection fraction (EF) and age, and to determine the diagnostic performance of 2MWT. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted in 180 cardiac patients. Data included age, EF, and walking distances from 6MWT and 2MWT. Correlations were analyzed using Pearson test. Functional capacity was defined as 6MWT >240 m. ROC analysis assessed 2MWT performance. Results Mean age was 58.83 ± 9.96 years and EF 49.54 ± 12.40%. Age showed a significant negative correlation with 6MWT (r = -0.222; p = 0.003) and 2MWT (r = -0.208; p = 0.005). EF showed a weak correlation with 2MWT (r = 0.149; p = 0.046) and no significant correlation with 6MWT. A strong correlation was found between 6MWT and 2MWT (r = 0.741; p < 0.001). ROC analysis showed excellent discrimination (AUC = 0.898), with an optimal cut-off of 91 m (sensitivity 88.3%, specificity 88.5%). Conclusion Age is associated with functional capacity, while EF shows limited correlation. The 2MWT demonstrates excellent accuracy and may serve as a practical alternative to 6MWT.Figure 1.Factors Affecting Functional Capacity (6MWT & 2MWT) in Cardiac Patients (N = 180) Top row: Scatter plots for Age vs 6MWT, EF vs 6MWT, and EF vs 2MWT with regression lines. Middle row: Age vs 2MWT, 6MWT vs 2MWT correlation, and ROC curve for 2MWT predicting functional capacity. Bottom: Forest plot of Pearson's r for all variable pairs. Red = p < 0.05. Regression lines: red = significant (p < 0.05), gray = not significant.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Raj et al. (2026) conducted a cross-sectional in cardiovascular disease (n=180). 2-Minute Walk Test vs. 6-Minute Walk Test was evaluated on Diagnostic performance of 2MWT for functional capacity (defined as 6MWT >240 m) (AUC 0.898). The 2-Minute Walk Test demonstrated excellent accuracy for identifying functional capacity in cardiac patients (AUC 0.898), with an optimal cut-off of 91 m (sensitivity 88.3%, specificity 88.5%).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: