J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2025 Oct;44:802-807. doi: 10.1016/j.jbmt.2025.07.013. Epub 2025 Jul 21.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To investigate if the 6-min step test elicits the same or higher physiological responses and its adverse events in comparison with the 6-min walk test after stroke.
METHODS: A cross-sectional, exploratory study was performed. The 6-min step test and the 6-min walk test were performed by individuals with chronic stroke. Physiological parameters (i.e., systolic and diastolic blood pressure, dyspnea, leg fatigue, heart rate and peripheral oxygen saturation) and adverse events were examined.
RESULTS: Fifty-seven individuals who have had a stroke (33 men), with a mean age of 58 years (SD 14) were included. The 6-min step test elicited higher levels of dyspnea (MD 1 point out of 10; 95 % CI 0.5 to 2) and leg fatigue (MD 2 points out of 10; 95 % CI 1 to 2) immediately after tests. In addition, heart rate was progressively higher (7-15 bpm) during the 6-min step test than the 6-min walk test. Immediately after the tests, heart rate was still higher for the 6-min step test (MD 17 bpm; 95 % CI 11 to 22). Two adverse events were reported during the 6-min step test.
CONCLUSION: In conclusion, the 6-min step test demands more from the cardiovascular and musculoskeletal systems, as higher levels of heart rate, dyspnea and leg fatigue were achieved in comparison with the 6-min walk test after stroke.
PMID:40954665 | DOI:10.1016/j.jbmt.2025.07.013