社區應用為導向之中高齡者走路速度檢測距離之研究

A community application-oriented measuring distance for walking speed tests in the middle-aged and older adults

緒論：人走路速度變慢為衰弱的徵象，社區是推動活躍老化的核心基本單位，因此，於社區執行走路測試，作為衰弱預防及健康促進成效指標相當重要。然而於社區執行檢測時常會遇到場地太小的限制。本研究目的在於找出適合於社區執行走路測試之距離。並透過實驗設計，確認走路過程中的最高速度所需之距離與區段，同時釐清在加速期及減速期之最短的加速期與減速期距離，以進一步探討走路測試所需加速距離、最快速度及減速區段。方法：本研究以385名50歲以上之社區民眾為受試者，進行14公尺平常走路速度與快速走路各三次檢測，計算14公尺中之10公尺的2-7公尺區段、2-8公尺區段、3-7公尺區段、3-8公尺區段之各區段速度，與計算0-2公尺區段、2-3公尺區段之加速期速度，及7-10公尺區段、8-10公尺區段之減速期速度。為提高檢測信效度，於正式檢測前，將10位訓練精良之檢測人員，進行二種走路速度手動計時時，同時安排無線檢測計時器計時，二種走路速度測試各測3次，共蒐集180筆檢測資料，統計分析結果顯示，手動計時與無線檢測器計時，二種檢測方式無差異。故本研究採手動計時進行檢測。結果：於加速度階段，平常走路及快速走路之速度於0-2公尺區段顯著低於2-3公尺區段；平常走路及快速走路之速度在3公尺之後呈現穩定狀態；平常走路速度於減速階段之7-10公尺區段顯著高於8-10公尺區段。結論：本研究建議於社區執行走路測試之距離至少需達10公尺；其中0-3公尺為加速區段，3-7公尺為最快速度平穩區段，7-10公尺為減速區段。

 

Introduction: A decrease in walking speed is a sign of frailty. The community is a core basic unit that drives activity levels. Therefore, it is important to implement walking tests in the community, as a health promotion efficacy indicator, to implement appropriate interventions for the prevention of frailty. However, testing in the community is often limited by the size of the test site. The objective of this study was to identify the distance that is suitable for carrying out walking tests in the community. This study confirmed the distance and area required to achieve the maximum speed during walking. Additionally, we identified the shortest distance required to achieve acceleration and deceleration, in order to further examine the distance required for walking tests. Methods: In this study, 385 community-living individuals aged above 50 years were recruited for three tests involving walking in normal and fast speeds for at a distance of 14m. The walking speed was recorded for various sections within 10m (2–7m, 2–8m, 3–7m, and 3–8m), for the acceleration phase in the 0–2m and 2–3m sections, and for the deceleration phase in the 7–10m and 8–10m sections. In order to increase the test reliability and validity, 10 testers were asked to manually time the two types of walking speed before the commencement of the actual tests. Simultaneously, a wireless timer was used to time both types of walking speeds thrice. A total of 180 data units were collected. Statistical analyses revealed no differences between manual and wireless timing. Therefore, this study adopted manual timers for the testing. Results: In the acceleration phase, the normal walking speed and fast walking speed in the 0–2m section was significantly lower than that in the 2–3m section. Both normal walking speed and fast walking speed were stable after 3m. At the deceleration phase, the normal walking speed in the 7–10m section was significantly higher than that in the 8–10m section. Conclusions: These findings indicate that community walking tests require a distance of at least 10m, with 0–3m as the acceleration section, 3–7m as the section in which fast walking speed is stable, and 7–10m as the deceleration section.