Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2015 Mar 13;2015(3):CD010200.
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010200.pub2.

Interventions for improving community ambulation in individuals with stroke

Ruth E Barclay  1 , Ted J Stevenson, William Poluha, Jacquie Ripat, Cristabel Nett, Cynthia S Srikesavan
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Interventions for improving community ambulation in individuals with stroke

Ruth E Barclay et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. .

Abstract

Background: Community ambulation refers to the ability of a person to walk in their own community, outside of their home and also indoors in private or public locations. Some people choose to walk for exercise or leisure and may walk with others as an important aspect of social functioning. Community ambulation is therefore an important skill for stroke survivors living in the community whose walking ability has been affected.

Objectives: To determine: (1) whether interventions improve community ambulation for stroke survivors, and (2) if any specific intervention method improves community ambulation more than other interventions.

Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (September 2014), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (November 2013), PubMed (1946 to November 2013), EMBASE (1980 to November 2013), CINAHL (1982 to November 2013), PsycINFO (1887 to November 2013), Scopus (1960 to November 2013), Web of Science (1900 to November 2013), SPORTDiscus (1975 to November 2013), and PEDro, CIRRIE and REHABDATA (November 2013). We also searched ongoing trials registers (November 2013) and reference lists, and performed a cited reference search.

Selection criteria: Selection criteria included parallel-group randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cross-over RCTs, studies in which participants are adult (aged 18 years or more) stroke survivors, and interventions that were aimed at improving community ambulation. We defined the primary outcome as participation; secondary outcomes included activity level outcomes related to gait and self-efficacy.

Data collection and analysis: One review author independently screened titles. Two review authors screened abstracts and full text articles, with a third review author was available to resolve any disagreements. Two review authors extracted data and assessed risk of bias. All outcomes were continuous. The analysis for the primary outcome used the generic inverse variance methods for meta-analysis, using the standardised mean difference (SMD) and standard error (SE) from the participation outcomes. Analyses for secondary outcomes all used SMD or mean difference (MD). We completed analyses for each outcome with all studies, and by type of community ambulation intervention (community or outdoor ambulation practice, virtual practice, and imagery practice). We considered trials for each outcome to be of low quality due to some trial design considerations, such as who knew what group the participants were in, and the number of people who dropped out of the studies.

Main results: We included five studies involving 266 participants (136 intervention; 130 control). All participants were adult stroke survivors, living in the community or a care home. Programmes to improve community ambulation consisted of walking practice in a variety of settings and environments in the community, or an indoor activity that mimicked community walking (including virtual reality or mental imagery). Three studies were funded by government agencies, and two had no funding.From two studies of 198 people there was low quality evidence for the effect of intervention on participation compared with control (SMD, 0.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.20 to 0.35 (using inverse variance). The CI for the effect of the intervention on gait speed was wide and does not exclude no difference (MD 0.12, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.24; four studies, 98 participants, low quality evidence). We considered the quality of the evidence to be low for all the remaining outcomes in our review: Community Walk Test (MD -6.35, 95% CI -21.59 to 8.88); Walking Ability Questionnaire (MD 0.53, 95% CI -5.59 to 6.66); Six-Minute Walk Test (MD 39.62 metres, 95% CI -8.26 to 87.51) and self-efficacy (SMD 0.32, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.72). We downgraded the quality of the evidence because of a high risk of bias and imprecision.

Authors' conclusions: There is currently insufficient evidence to establish the effect of community ambulation interventions or to support a change in clinical practice. More research is needed to determine if practicing outdoor or community walking will improve participation and community ambulation skills for stroke survivors living in the community.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Ruth E Barclay: none known. Ted J Stevenson: none known. William Poluha: none known. Jacquie Ripat: none known. Cristabel Nett: receives payment for providing physiotherapy advice and treatment to clients with brain injury including CVA to improve their walking and mobility, apart from her employment as an instructor at the University of Manitoba. Cynthia S Srikesavan: none known.

Figures

1
1
Study flow diagram.
2
2
Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
3
3
Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
1.1
1.1. Analysis
Comparison 1 Community ambulation intervention versus other, Outcome 1 Participation.
1.2
1.2. Analysis
Comparison 1 Community ambulation intervention versus other, Outcome 2 Community Walk Test.
1.3
1.3. Analysis
Comparison 1 Community ambulation intervention versus other, Outcome 3 Walking Ability Questionnaire.
1.4
1.4. Analysis
Comparison 1 Community ambulation intervention versus other, Outcome 4 Gait speed.
1.5
1.5. Analysis
Comparison 1 Community ambulation intervention versus other, Outcome 5 Six‐Minute Walk Test.
1.6
1.6. Analysis
Comparison 1 Community ambulation intervention versus other, Outcome 6 Self‐efficacy.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Update of

  • doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010200

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

References to studies included in this review

Dickstein 2013 {published data only}
    1. Dickstein R, Deutsch JE, Yoeli Y, Kafri M, Falash F, Dunsky A, et al. Effects of integrated motor imagery practice on gait of individuals with chronic stroke: a half‐crossover randomized study. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2013;94(11):2119‐25. - PubMed
Logan 2004 {published data only}
    1. Logan PA, Gladman JRF, Avery A, Walker MF, Dyas J, Groom L. Randomised controlled trial of an occupational therapy intervention to increase outdoor mobility after stroke. BMJ 2004;329(7479):1372‐5. - PMC - PubMed
Lord 2008 {published and unpublished data}
    1. Lord SE, McPherson KM, McNaughton HK, Rochester L, Weatherall M. How feasible is the attainment of community ambulation after stroke? A pilot randomized controlled trial to evaluate community‐based physiotherapy in subacute stroke. Clinical Rehabilitation 2008;22(3):215‐25. - PubMed
Park 2011 {published data only}
    1. Park HJ, Oh DW, Kim SY, Choi JD. Effectiveness of community‐based ambulation training for walking function of post‐stroke hemiparesis: a randomized controlled pilot trial. Clinical Rehabilitation 2011;25(5):451‐9. - PubMed
Yang 2008 {published data only}
    1. Yang YR, Tsai MP, Chuang TY, Sung WH, Wang RY. Virtual reality‐based training improved community ambulation in individuals with stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Gait & Posture 2008;28(2):201‐6. - PubMed

References to studies excluded from this review

Mirelman 2009 {published data only}
    1. Mirelman A, Bonato P, Deutsch JE. Effects of training with a robot‐virtual reality system compared with a robot alone on the gait of individuals after stroke. Stroke 2009;40(1):169‐74. - PubMed

References to ongoing studies

Logan 2012 {published data only}
    1. Logan PA, Leighton MP, Walker MF, Armstrong S, Gladman JRF, Sach TH, et al. A multi‐centre randomised controlled trial of rehabilitation aimed at improving outdoor mobility for people after stroke: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials 2012;13:86. - PMC - PubMed
Mansfield 2013 {published data only}
    1. Mansfield A, Wong JS, Bayley M, Biasin L, Brooks D, Brunton K, et al. Using wireless technology in clinical practice: does feedback of daily walking activity improve walking outcomes of individuals receiving rehabilitation post‐stroke? Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. BMC Neurology 2013;13:93. - PMC - PubMed

Additional references

Ada 2003
    1. Ada L, Dean CM, Hall JM, Bampton J, Crompton S. A treadmill and overground walking program improves walking in persons residing in the community after stroke: a placebo‐controlled, randomized trial. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2003;84(10):1486‐91. - PubMed
Ada 2009
    1. Ada L, Dean CM, Lindley R, Lloyd G. Improving community ambulation after stroke: the AMBULATE trial. BMC Neurology 2009;9:8. - PMC - PubMed
Anderson 1996
    1. Anderson C, Laubscher S, Burns R. Validation of the Short Form 36 (SF‐36) health survey questionnaire among stroke patients. Stroke 1996;27(10):1812‐6. - PubMed
Barclay 2014
    1. Barclay R, Ripat J, Mayo N. Factors describing community ambulation after stroke: a mixed‐methods study. Clinical Rehabilitation 2014 August 29 [Epub ahead of print]. - PubMed
Barclay‐Goddard 2012a
    1. Barclay‐Goddard R, Ripat J, Mayo NE. Developing a model of participation post‐stroke: a mixed‐methods approach. Quality of Life Research 2012;21(3):417‐26. - PMC - PubMed
Borenstein 2009
    1. Borenstein M. Introduction to Meta‐Analysis. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 2009.
Corrigan 2012
    1. Corrigan R, McBurney H. Community ambulation: perceptions of rehabilitation physiotherapists in rural and regional communities. Physiotherapy Theory and Practice 2012;28(1):10‐7. - PubMed
Danielsson 2011
    1. Danielsson A, Willén C, Sunnerhagen KS. Is walking endurance associated with activity and participation later after stroke?. Disability and Rehabilitation 2011;33(21‐2):2053‐7. - PubMed
Donovan 2008
    1. Donovan K, Lord SE, McNaughton HK, Weatherall M. Mobility beyond the clinic: the effect of environment on gait and its measurement in community‐ambulant stroke survivors. Clinical Rehabilitation 2008;22(6):556‐63. - PubMed
Duncan 1999
    1. Duncan PW, Wallace D, Lai SM, Johnson D, Embretson S, Laster LJ. The stroke impact scale version 2.0. Evaluation of reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change. Stroke 1999;30(10):2131‐40. - PubMed
English 2010
    1. English C, Hillier SL. Circuit class therapy for improving mobility after stroke. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2010, Issue 7. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007513.pub2] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Feigin 2003
    1. Feigin VL, Lawes CM, Bennett DA, Anderson CS. Stroke epidemiology: a review of population‐based studies of incidence, prevalence, and case‐fatality in the late 20th century. Lancet Neurology 2003;2(1):43‐53. - PubMed
French 2007
    1. French B, Thomas LH, Leathley MJ, Sutton CJ, McAdam J, Forster A, et al. Repetitive task training for improving functional ability after stroke. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2007, Issue 4. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006073.pub2] - DOI - PubMed
GRADEpro 2014
    1. GRADEpro. [Computer program on www.gradepro.org]. McMaster University 2014.
Harwood 1994a
    1. Harwood RH, Rogers A, Dickinson E, Ebrahim S. Measuring handicap: the London Handicap Scale, a new outcome measure for chronic disease. Quality in Health Care 1994;3(1):11‐6. - PMC - PubMed
Harwood 1994b
    1. Harwood RH, Gompertz P, Ebrahim S. Handicap one year after a stroke: validity of a new scale. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry 1994;57(7):825‐9. - PMC - PubMed
Heart and Stroke 2014
    1. Heart and Stroke Foundation Canada. Stroke statistics. http://www.heartandstroke.com/site/c.ikIQLcMWJtE/b.3483991/k.34A8/Statis... (accessed 17 July 2014).
Higgins 2011a
    1. Higgins JPT, Altman DG, Sterne JAC. Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org.
Higgins 2011b
    1. Higgins JPT, Altman DG, Sterne JAC. Section 7.7.3: Data extraction for continuous outcomes. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors) Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org.
Higgins 2011c
    1. Higgins JPT, Altman DG, Sterne JAC. 7.7.7.1 Effect estimates and generic inverse variance meta‐analysis. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors) Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org.
Langhammer 2010
    1. Langhammer B, Stanghelle JK. Exercise on a treadmill of walking outdoors? A randomized controlled trial comparing effectiveness of two walking exercise programmes late after stroke. Clinical Rehabilitation 2010;24(1):46‐54. - PubMed
Laver 2011
    1. Laver KE, George S, Thomas S, Deutsch JE, Crotty M. Virtual reality for stroke rehabilitation. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2011, Issue 9. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008349.pub2] - DOI - PubMed
Liu 2008
    1. Liu J, Drutz C, Kumar R, McVicar L, Weinberger R, Brooks D, et al. Use of the six‐minute walk test poststroke: is there a practice effect?. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2008;89(9):1686‐92. - PubMed
Lord 2004
    1. Lord S, McPherson K, McNaughton H, Rochester L, Weatherall M. Community ambulation after stroke: how important and obtainable is it and what measures appear predictive?. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2004;85(2):234‐9. - PubMed
Lord 2005
    1. Lord SE, Rochester L. Measurement of community ambulation after stroke ‐ current status and future developments. Stroke 2005;36(7):1457‐61. - PubMed
MacKay‐Lyons 2005
    1. MacKay‐Lyons MJ, Howlett J. Exercise capacity and cardiovascular adaptations to aerobic training early after stroke. Topics in Stroke Rehabiliation 2005;12(1):31‐44. - PubMed
Mayo 1999
    1. Mayo N, Wood‐Dauphinee S, Ahmed S, Gordon C, Higgins J, McEwen S, et al. Disablement following stroke. Disability and Rehabilitation 1999;21(5/6):258‐68. - PubMed
Mehrholz 2014
    1. Mehrholz J, Pohl M, Elsner B. Treadmill training and body weight support for walking after stroke. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2014, Issue 1. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002840.pub3] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Palmer 2005
    1. Palmer AJ, Valentine WJ, Roze S, Lammert M, Spiesser J, Gabriel S. Overview of costs of stroke from published, incidence‐based studies spanning 16 industrialized countries. Current Medical Research and Opinion 2005;21(1):19‐26. - PubMed
Pang 2005
    1. Pang MY, Eng JJ, Dawson AS, McKay HA, Harris JE. A community‐based fitness and mobility exercise program for older adults with chronic stroke: a randomized, controlled trial. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2005;53(10):1667‐74. - PMC - PubMed
Patla 1999
    1. Patla AE, Shumway‐Cook A. Dimensions of mobility: defining the complexity and difficulty associated with community mobility. Journal of Aging and Physical Activity 1999;7:7‐19.
Patrick 1993
    1. Patrick D, Erickson P. Health Status and Health Policy ‐ Quality of Life in Health Care Evaluation and Resource Allocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993.
Perry 1995
    1. Perry J, Garrett M, Gronley JK, Mulroy SJ. Classification of walking handicap in the stroke population. Stroke 1995;26(6):982‐9. - PubMed
Powell 1995
    1. Powell LE, Myers AM. The Activities‐specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale. Journal of Gerontology 1995;50A(1):M28‐34. - PubMed
RevMan 2014 [Computer program]
    1. The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration. Review Manager (RevMan). Version 5.3. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014.
Ripat 2010
    1. Ripat JD, Redmond JD, Grabowecky BR. The Winter Walkability Project: occupational therapists' role in promoting citizen engagement. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy 2010;77(1):7‐14. - PubMed
Robinson 2011a
    1. Robinson CA, Shumway‐Cook A, Matsuda PN, Ciol MA. Understanding physical factors associated with participation in community ambulation following stroke. Disability and Rehabilitation 2011;33(12):1033‐42. - PubMed
Robinson 2011b
    1. Robinson CA, Shumway‐Cook A, Ciol MA, Kartin D. Participation in community walking following stroke: subjective versus objective measures and the impact of personal factors. Physical Therapy 2011;91(12):1865‐76. - PubMed
Salbach 2004
    1. Salbach NM, Mayo NE, Wood‐Dauphinee S, Henley JA, Richards CL, Côté R. A task‐oriented intervention enhances walking distance and speed in the first year post stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Clinical Rehabilitation 2004;18(5):509‐19. - PubMed
Saunders 2013
    1. Saunders DH, Sanderson M, Brazzelli M, Greig CA, Mead GE. Physical fitness training for stroke patients. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 10. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003316.pub5] - DOI - PubMed
Shumway‐Cook 2012
    1. Shumway‐Cook A, Woollacott MH. Motor Control – Translating Research into Clinical Practice. 4th Edition. Baltimore, MD: Lippincott, Williams, and Wilkins, 2012.
Sprangers 2002
    1. Sprangers MA. Quality‐of‐life assessment in oncology. Achievements and challenges. Acta Oncologica 2002;41(3):229‐37. - PubMed
States 2009
    1. States RA, Pappas E, Salem Y. Overground physical therapy gait training for chronic stroke patients with mobility deficits. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2009, Issue 3. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006075.pub2] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Stewart 2001
    1. Stewart AL, Mills KM, King AC, Haskell WL, Gillis D, Ritter PL. CHAMPS physical activity questionnaire for older adults: outcomes for interventions. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 2001;33(7):1126‐41. - PubMed
Taylor 2006
    1. Taylor D, Stretton CM, Mudge S, Garrett N. Does clinic‐measured gait speed differ from gait speed measured in the community in people with stroke?. Clinical Rehabilitation 2006;20(5):438‐44. - PubMed
van de Port 2008
    1. Port IG, Kwakkel G, Lindeman E. Community ambulation in patients with chronic stroke: how is it related to gait speed?. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 2008;40(1):23‐7. - PubMed
Ware 1992
    1. Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36‐Item Short‐Form Health Survey (SF‐36) I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Medical Care 1992;30(6):473‐83. - PubMed
Wevers 2011
    1. Wevers LEG, Kwakkel G, Port IGL. Is outdoor use of the six‐minute walk test with a global positioning system in stroke patients' own neighbourhoods reproducible and valid?. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 2011;43(11):1027‐31. - PubMed
WHO 2000
    1. World Health Organization, Truelson T, Begg S, Mathers C. The Global Burden of Cerebrovascular Disease 2000. www.who.int/healthinfo/statistics/bod_cerebrovasculardiseasestroke.pdf (accessed 5 July 2012):1‐2.
WHO 2001
    1. World Health Organization. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2001.
WHO 2004
    1. World Health Organization, Mackay J, Mensch G (editors). The Atlas of Heart Disease and Stroke 2004. www.who.int/cardiovascular_diseases/resources/atlas/en (accessed 5 July 2012).
WHO 2008
    1. World Health Organization. The Global Burden of Disease 2004 Update. www.who.int/healthinfo/global_burden_disease/GBD_report_2004update_part3... (accessed 5 July 2012).
Wolf 1999
    1. Wolf SL, Catlin PA, Gage K, Gurucharri K, Robertson R, Stephen K. Establishing the reliability and validity of measurements of walking time using the Emory Functional Ambulation Profile. Physical Therapy 1999;79(12):1122‐33. - PubMed
Wood‐Dauphinee 1988
    1. Wood‐Dauphinee SL, Opzoomer MA, Williams JI, Marchand B, Spitzer WO. Assessment of global function: the Reintegration to Normal Living Index. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabiliation 1988;69(8):583‐90. - PubMed

References to other published versions of this review

Barclay‐Goddard 2012b
    1. Barclay‐Goddard RE, Stevenson TJ, Poluha W, Ripat J, Nett C. Interventions for improving community ambulation in individuals with stroke. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 11. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010200] - DOI - PMC - PubMed