Walking cadence (steps/min) and intensity in 61-85-year-old adults: the CADENCE-Adults study

Catrine Tudor-Locke, Jose Mora-Gonzalez, Scott W Ducharme, Elroy J Aguiar, John M Schuna Jr, Tiago V Barreira, Christopher C Moore, Colleen J Chase, Zachary R Gould, Marcos A Amalbert-Birriel, Stuart R Chipkin, John Staudenmayer, Catrine Tudor-Locke, Jose Mora-Gonzalez, Scott W Ducharme, Elroy J Aguiar, John M Schuna Jr, Tiago V Barreira, Christopher C Moore, Colleen J Chase, Zachary R Gould, Marcos A Amalbert-Birriel, Stuart R Chipkin, John Staudenmayer

Abstract

Background: Heuristic (i.e., evidence-based, rounded) cadences of ≥100 and ≥ 130 steps/min have consistently corresponded with absolutely-defined moderate (3 metabolic equivalents [METs]) and vigorous (6 METs) physical activity intensity, respectively, in adults 21-60 years of age. There is no consensus regarding similar thresholds in older adults.

Purpose: To provide heuristic cadence thresholds for 3, 4, 5, and 6 METs in 61-85-year-old adults.

Methods: Ninety-eight community-dwelling ambulatory and ostensibly healthy older adults (age = 72.6 ± 6.9 years; 49% women) walked on a treadmill for a series of 5-min bouts (beginning at 0.5 mph with 0.5 mph increments) in this laboratory-based cross-sectional study until: 1) transitioning to running, 2) reaching ≥75% of their age-predicted maximum heart rate, or 3) reporting a Borg rating of perceived exertion > 13. Cadence was directly observed and hand-tallied. Intensity (oxygen uptake [VO2] mL/kg/min) was assessed with indirect calorimetry and converted to METs (1 MET = 3.5 mL/kg/min). Cadence thresholds were identified via segmented mixed effects model regression and using Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves. Final heuristic cadence thresholds represented an analytical compromise based on classification accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, and overall accuracy).

Results: Cadences of 103.1 (95% Prediction Interval: 70.0-114.2), 116.4 (105.3-127.4), 129.6 (118.6-140.7), and 142.9 steps/min (131.8-148.4) were identified for 3, 4, 5, and 6 METs, respectively, based on the segmented regression. Comparable values based on ROC analysis were 100.3 (95% Confidence Intervals: 95.7-103.1), 111.5 (106.1-112.9), 116.0 (112.4-120.2), and 128.6 steps/min (128.3-136.4). Heuristic cadence thresholds of 100, 110, and 120 were associated with 3, 4, and 5 METs. Data to inform a threshold for ≥6 METs was limited, as only 6/98 (6.0%) participants achieved this intensity.

Conclusions: Consistent with previous data collected from 21-40 and 41-60-year-old adults, heuristic cadence thresholds of 100, 110, and 120 steps/min were associated with 3, 4, and 5 METs, respectively, in 61-85-year-old adults. Most older adults tested did not achieve the intensity of ≥6 METs; therefore, our data do not support establishing thresholds corresponding with this intensity level.

Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02650258 . Registered 24 December 2015.

Keywords: Accelerometer; Exercise; Pedometer; Physical activity; Step rate.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare they have no conflicts of interest. The results of the present study do not constitute endorsement by the International Society of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity. The results of the study are presented clearly, honestly, and without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate data manipulation.

© 2021. The Author(s).

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Relationship between cadence and METs using a segmented regression model with random coefficients in older adults. Breakpoint is at 100 steps/min; marginal R2 = 0.74. Red line represents the mean MET values (y–axis) for each corresponding cadence value (x–axis), and the black lines represent the 95% Prediction Intervals. Blue horizontal dotted lines indicate moderate (3 METs) and vigorous intensities (6 METs)
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Classification accuracy of heuristic cadence thresholds and MET intensities. A) ≥ 100 steps/min and ≥ 3 METs, B) ≥ 130 steps/min and ≥ 6 METs)

References

    1. Bassett DR, Jr, Toth LP, LaMunion SR, Crouter SE. Step counting: a review of measurement considerations and health-related applications. Sports Med. 2017;47(7):1303–1315. doi: 10.1007/s40279-016-0663-1.
    1. Tudor-Locke C, Rowe DA. Using cadence to study free-living ambulatory behavior. Sports Med. 2012;42(5):381–398. doi: 10.2165/11599170-000000000-00000.
    1. Tudor-Locke C, Han H, Aguiar EJ, et al. How fast is fast enough? Walking cadence (steps/min) as a practical estimate of intensity in adults: a narrative review. Br J Sports Med. 2018;52(12):776–788. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2017-097628.
    1. Tudor-Locke C, Craig CL, Brown WJ, et al. How many steps/day are enough? For adults. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2011;8:79. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-8-79.
    1. Abel M, Hannon J, Mullineaux D, Beighle A. Determination of step rate thresholds corresponding to physical activity intensity classifications in adults. J Phys Act Health. 2011;8(1):45–51. doi: 10.1123/jpah.8.1.45.
    1. Tudor-Locke C, Sisson SB, Collova T, Lee SM, Swan PD. Pedometer-determined step count guidelines for classifying walking intensity in a young ostensibly healthy population. Can J Appl Physiol. 2005;30(6):666–676. doi: 10.1139/h05-147.
    1. Beets MW, Agiovlasitis S, Fahs CA, Ranadive SM, Fernhall B. Adjusting step count recommendations for anthropometric variations in leg length. J Sci Med Sport. 2010;13(5):509–512. doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2009.11.002.
    1. Rowe DA, Welk GJ, Heil DP, et al. Stride rate recommendations for moderate intensity walking. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011;43(2):312–318. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181e9d99a.
    1. Marshall SJ, Levy SS, Tudor-Locke CE, et al. Translating physical activity recommendations into a pedometer-based step goal: 3000 steps in 30 minutes. Am J Prev Med. 2009;36(5):410–415. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2009.01.021.
    1. O'Brien MW, Kivell MJ, Wojcik WR, d'Entremont G, Kimmerly DS, Fowles JR. Step rate thresholds associated with moderate and vigorous physical activity in adults. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018;15(11):2454. 10.3390/ijerph15112454.
    1. Tudor-Locke C, Aguiar EJ, Han H, et al. Walking cadence (steps/min) and intensity in 21-40 year olds: CADENCE-adults. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2019;16(1):8. doi: 10.1186/s12966-019-0769-6.
    1. O'Brien MW, Kivell MJ, Wojcik WR, D'Entremont GR, Kimmerly DS, Fowles JR. Influence of anthropometrics on step-rate thresholds for moderate and vigorous physical activity in older adults: scientific modeling study. JMIR Aging. 2018;1(2):e12363. doi: 10.2196/12363.
    1. Tudor-Locke C, Ducharme SW, Aguiar EJ, et al. Walking cadence (steps/min) and intensity in 41 to 60-year-old adults: the CADENCE-adults study. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2020;17(1):137. doi: 10.1186/s12966-020-01045-z.
    1. Amagasa S, Fukushima N, Kikuchi H, et al. Older Adults' daily step counts and time in sedentary behavior and different intensities of physical activity. J Epidemiol. 2021;31(5):350–355. doi: 10.2188/jea.JE20200080.
    1. Sanders GJ, Boddy LM, Sparks SA, et al. Evaluation of wrist and hip sedentary behaviour and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity raw acceleration cutpoints in older adults. J Sports Sci. 2019;37(11):1270–1279. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2018.1555904.
    1. Das Gupta S, Bobbert MF, Kistemaker DA. The metabolic cost of walking in healthy young and older adults - a systematic review and Meta analysis. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):9956. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-45602-4.
    1. Peacock L, Hewitt A, Rowe DA, Sutherland R. Stride rate and walking intensity in healthy older adults. J Aging Phys Act. 2014;22(2):276–283. doi: 10.1123/japa.2012-0333.
    1. Borg GA. Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1982;14(5):377–381. doi: 10.1249/00005768-198205000-00012.
    1. American College of Sports Medicine . ACSM's guidelines for exercise testing and prescription. 10. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer; 2018.
    1. Ainsworth BE, Haskell WL, Herrmann SD, et al. 2011 compendium of physical activities: a second update of codes and MET values. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011;43(8):1575–1581. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e31821ece12.
    1. 2018 Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee . 2018 physical activity guidelines advisory committee scientific report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2018.
    1. Youden WJ. Index for rating diagnostic tests. Cancer. 1950;3(1):32–35. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(1950)3:1<32::AID-CNCR2820030106>;2-3.
    1. Metz CE. Basic principles of ROC analysis. Semin Nucl Med. 1978;8(4):283–298. doi: 10.1016/S0001-2998(78)80014-2.
    1. Serrano F, Slaght J, Senechal M, Duhamel T, Bouchard DR. Identification and prediction of the walking cadence required to reach moderate intensity using individually-determined relative moderate intensity in older adults. J Aging Phys Act. 2017;25(2):205–211. doi: 10.1123/japa.2015-0262.
    1. Jerome GJ, Ko SU, Kauffman D, Studenski SA, Ferrucci L, Simonsick EM. Gait characteristics associated with walking speed decline in older adults: results from the Baltimore longitudinal study of aging. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2015;60(2):239–243. doi: 10.1016/j.archger.2015.01.007.
    1. Russell DM, Apatoczky DT. Walking at the preferred stride frequency minimizes muscle activity. Gait Posture. 2016;45:181–186. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2016.01.027.
    1. Garber CE, Blissmer B, Deschenes MR, et al. American College of Sports Medicine position stand. Quantity and quality of exercise for developing and maintaining cardiorespiratory, musculoskeletal, and neuromotor fitness in apparently healthy adults: guidance for prescribing exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011;43(7):1334–1359. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e318213fefb.
    1. Shephard RJ. Absolute versus relative intensity of physical activity in a dose-response context. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2001;33(6 Suppl):S400–18; discussion S19–20.
    1. Moore CC, Aguiar EJ, Ducharme SW, Tudor-Locke C. Development of a cadence-based metabolic equation for walking. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2021;53(1):165–173. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000002430.
    1. Han H, Kim H, Sun W, Malaska M, Miller B. Validation of wearable activity monitors for real-time cadence. J Sports Sci. 2020;38(4):383–389. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2019.1702281.
    1. Ducharme SW, Sands CJ, Moore CC, Aguiar EJ, Hamill J, Tudor-Locke C. Changes to gait speed and the walk ratio with rhythmic auditory cuing. Gait Posture. 2018;66:255–259. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2018.09.006.
    1. Perry DC, Moore CC, Sands CJ, et al. Using music-based cadence entrainment to manipulate walking intensity. J Phys Act Health. 2019;16(11):1039–1046. doi: 10.1123/jpah.2019-0097.
    1. Fiser WM, Hays NP, Rogers SC, et al. Fiser WM, Hays NP, Rogers SC, Kajkenova O, Williams AE, Evans CM, Evans WJ.Energetics of walking in elderly people: factors related to gait speed. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2010 65(12):1332–7. 10.1093/gerona/glq137. Epub 2010 Aug 1.
    1. Bastone Ade C, Ferriolli E, Teixeira CP, Dias JM, Dias RC. Aerobic fitness and habitual physical activity in frail and nonfrail community-dwelling elderly. J Phys Act Health. 2015;12(9):1304–1311. doi: 10.1123/jpah.2014-0290.
    1. Aguiar EJ, Gould ZR, Ducharme SW, Moore CC, McCullough AK, Tudor-Locke C. Cadence-based classification of minimally moderate intensity during 0verground walking in 21- to 40-year-old adults. J Phys Act Health. 2019:1–6.
    1. WHO Expert Committee on physical status: the use and interpretation of anthropometry. Physical status : the use and interpretation of anthropometry : report of a WHO Expert committee. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1995.

Source: PubMed

3
S'abonner