Background Poor gait performance predicts risk of developing dementia. No structured critical evaluation has been conducted to study this association yet. The aim of this meta-analysis was to systematically examine the association of poor gait performance with incidence of dementia. Methods An English and French Medline search was conducted in June 2015, with no limit of date, using the medical subject headings terms “Gait” OR “Gait Disorders, Neurologic” OR “Gait Apraxia” OR “Gait Ataxia” AND “Dementia” OR “Frontotemporal Dementia” OR “Dementia, Multi-Infarct” OR “Dementia, Vascular” OR “Alzheimer Disease” OR “Lewy Body Disease” OR “Frontotemporal Dementia With Motor Neuron Disease” (Supplementary Concept). Poor gait performance was defined by standardized tests of walking, and dementia was diagnosed according to international consensus criteria. Four etiologies of dementia were identified: any dementia, Alzheimer disease (AD), vascular dementia (VaD), and non-AD (ie, pooling VaD, mixed dementias, and other dementias). Fixed effects meta-analyses were performed on the estimates in order to generate summary values. Results Of the 796 identified abstracts, 12 (1.5%) were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. Poor gait performance predicted dementia [pooled hazard ratio (HR) combined with relative risk and odds ratio = 1.53 with P < .001 for any dementia, pooled HR = 1.79 with P < .001 for VaD, HR = 1.89 with P value < .001 for non-AD]. Findings were weaker for predicting AD (HR = 1.03 with P value = .004). Conclusions This meta-analysis provides evidence that poor gait performance predicts dementia. This association depends on the type of dementia; poor gait performance is a stronger predictor of non-AD dementias than AD.

Background The differences in gait abnormalities from the earliest to the latter stages of dementia and in the different subtypes of dementia have not been fully examined. This study aims to compare spatio-temporal gait parameters in cognitively healthy individuals, patients with amnestic (aMCI) and non-amnestic (naMCI) MCI, and patients with mild and moderate stages of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and non-Alzheimer’s disease (non-AD). Methods Based on a cross-sectional design, 1719 participants (77.4±7.3 years, 53.9% female) were recruited from cohorts from seven countries participating in the “Gait, cOgnitiOn & Decline” initiative. Mean values and coefficients of variation of spatio-temporal gait parameters were measured during normal pace walking with the GAITRite system at all sites. Results Performance of spatio-temporal gait parameters declined in parallel to the stage of cognitive decline from MCI status to moderate dementia. Gait parameters of patients with naMCI were more disturbed compared to patients with aMCI, and MCI subgroups performed better than demented patients. Patients with non-AD dementia had worse gait performance than those with AD dementia. This degradation of the gait parameters was similar between mean values and coefficients of variation of spatio-temporal gait parameters in the earliest stages of cognitive decline, but different in the most advanced stages, especially in the non-AD subtypes. Conclusions Spatio-temporal gait parameters were more disturbed in the advanced stages of dementia, and more affected in the non-AD dementias than in AD. These findings suggest that quantitative gait parameters could be used as a surrogate marker for improving the diagnosis of dementia.

Background: Gait disorders, a highly prevalent condition in older adults, are associated with several adverse health consequences. Gait analysis allows qualitative and quantitative assessments of gait that improves the understanding of mechanisms of gait disorders and the choice of interventions. This manuscript aims (1) to give consensus guidance for clinical and spatiotemporal gait analysis based on the recorded footfalls in older adults aged 65 years and over, and (2) to provide reference values for spatiotemporal gait parameters based on the recorded footfalls in healthy older adults free of cognitive impairment and multi-morbidities.Methods: International experts working in a network of two different consortiums (i.e., Biomathics and Canadian Gait Consortium) participated in this initiative. First, they identified items of standardized information following the usual procedure of formulation of consensus findings. Second, they merged databases including spatiotemporal gait assessments with GAITRite® system and clinical information from the “Gait, cOgnitiOn & Decline” (GOOD) initiative and the Generation 100 (Gen 100) study. Only healthy—free of cognitive impairment and multi-morbidities (i.e., ≤ 3 therapeutics taken daily)—participants aged 65 and older were selected. Age, sex, body mass index, mean values, and coefficients of variation (CoV) of gait parameters were used for the analyses.Results: Standardized systematic assessment of three categories of items, which were demographics and clinical information, and gait characteristics (clinical and spatiotemporal gait analysis based on the recorded footfalls), were selected for the proposed guidelines. Two complementary sets of items were distinguished: a minimal data set and a full data set. In addition, a total of 954 participants (mean age 72.8 ± 4.8 years, 45.8% women) were recruited to establish the reference values. Performance of spatiotemporal gait parameters based on the recorded footfalls declined with increasing age (mean values and CoV) and demonstrated sex differences (mean values).Conclusions: Based on an international multicenter collaboration, we propose consensus guidelines for gait assessment and spatiotemporal gait analysis based on the recorded footfalls, and reference values for healthy older adults.

Objectives Falls are highly prevalent in individuals with cognitive decline. The complex relationship between falls and cognitive decline (including both subtype and severity of dementia) and the influence of gait disorders have not been studied. This study aimed to examine the association between the subtype (Alzheimer disease [AD] versus non-AD) and the severity (from preclinical to moderate dementia) of cognitive impairment and falls, and to establish an association between falls and gait parameters during the course of dementia. Design Multicenter cross-sectional study. Setting “Gait, cOgnitiOn & Decline” (GOOD) initiative. Participants A total of 2496 older adults (76.6 ± 7.6 years; 55.0% women) were included in this study (1161 cognitively healthy individuals [CHI], 529 patients with mild cognitive impairment [MCI], 456 patients with mild dementia, and 350 with moderate dementia) from 7 countries. Measurements Falls history was collected retrospectively at baseline in each study. Gait speed and stride time variability were recorded at usual walking pace with the GAITRite system. Results The prevalence of individuals who fall was 50% in AD and 64% in non-AD; whereas it was 25% in CHIs. Only mild and moderate non-AD dementia were associated with an increased risk for falls in comparison with CHI. Higher stride time variability was associated with falls in older adults without dementia (CHI and each MCI subgroup) and mild non-AD dementia, whereas lower gait speed was associated with falls in all participant groups, except in mild AD dementia. When gait speed was adjusted for, higher stride time variability was associated with falls only in CHIs (odds ratio 1.14; P = .012), but not in MCI or in patients with dementia. Conclusions These findings suggest that non-AD, but not AD dementia, is associated with increased falls in comparison with CHIs. The association between gait parameters and falls also differs across cognitive status, suggesting different mechanisms leading to falls in older individuals with dementia in comparison with CHIs who fall.

The Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST) assesses executive and frontal lobe function and can be administered manually or by computer. Despite the widespread application of the 2 versions, the psychometric equivalence of their scores has rarely been evaluated and only a limited set of criteria has been considered. The present experimental study (N = 100 healthy adults) therefore examined the psychometric equivalence of 4 scores (i.e., Total Correct, Percentage of Errors, Perseverative Errors, and Failure-to-Maintain-Set) obtained on the 2 versions of the WCST in terms of 4 key criteria identified within the framework of classical test theory. The results showed considerable differences in variances, small to modest parallel-forms reliability coefficients, and small to modest temporal stability coefficients. Taken together, our results suggest that scores on the manual version and the computer version of the WCST show incomplete psychometric equivalence.