BACKGROUND: Improving walking capacity is a key objective of post-stroke rehabilitation. Evidence describing the quality and protocols of standardized tools for assessing walking capacity can facilitate their implementation. OBJECTIVE: To synthesize existing literature describing test protocols and measurement properties of distance-limited walk tests in people post-stroke. METHODS: Electronic database searches were completed in 2017. Records were screened and appraised for quality. RESULTS: Data were extracted from 43 eligible articles. Among the 12 walk tests identified, the 10-metre walk test (10mWT) at a comfortable pace was most commonly evaluated. Sixty-three unique protocols at comfortable and fast paces were identified. Walking pace and walkway surface, but not walkway length, influenced walking speed. Intraclass correlation coefficients for test-retest reliability ranged from 0.80–0.99 across walk tests. Measurement error values ranged from 0.04–0.40 and 0.06 to 0.20 for the 10mWT at comfortable and fast and paces, respectively. Across walk tests, performance was most frequently correlated with measures of strength, balance, and physical activity (r = 0.26-0.8, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The 10mWT has the most evidence of reliability and validity. Findings indicate that studies that include people with severe walking deficits, in acute and subacute phases of recovery, with improved quality of reporting, are needed.

Limited community ambulation, defined as independent mobility outside the home, predicts adverse outcomes in older adults. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine outdoor community ambulation intervention effectiveness in older adults. We searched six databases until October 2021. Studies with an evaluative research objective, older adult population, and outdoor community ambulation interventions were eligible. After reviewing 23,172 records, five studies were included. The meta-analysis found no significant difference in walking endurance and depression outcomes between outdoor community ambulation and comparison interventions. For outcomes not suitable for meta-analysis, studies showed no significant difference in walking activity, anxiety, and general and health-related quality of life, and possible improvements in gait speed and lower extremity function and strength. Most evidence was of low to very low certainty. Considering the limited evidence base, the design, implementation, and evaluation of outdoor community ambulation interventions in older adults should be prioritized in primary research.

Purpose: To describe program representatives’ perceptions of the: (1) type and work setting of healthcare professionals who refer to community-based exercise programs with healthcare-community partnerships (CBEP-HCPs) by community size; (2) nature, frequency, and utility of strategies used to promote referral from healthcare professionals to CBEP-HCPs; and (3) facilitators and barriers to CBEP-HCP promotion. Method: We invited individuals involved with the Together in Movement and Exercise (TIME™) program in 48 centres to participate in a cross-sectional survey. TIME™ is a group, task-oriented CBEP-HCP taught by fitness instructors; healthcare partners promote referrals. Data were summarized using frequencies and percentages. Content analysis was used for open-ended questions. Results: Twenty-three representatives of 27 TIME™ programs (56% response rate) participated. Out of 26 healthcare partners identified, 69% were physical therapists. We report the most common findings: programs received referrals from physical therapists ( n = 16, 70%); programs gave healthcare partners promotional materials (e.g., flyers) to facilitate referrals ( n = 17, 63%); strong relationships with healthcare partners facilitated promotion ( n = 18, 78%); and representatives perceived their lack of credibility challenged promotion ( n = 3, 23%). Conclusions: Physical therapists were the most common referral source. Healthcare partners were instrumental in program promotion. Future research is needed to leverage referrals from physical therapists in settings other than hospitals and to better understand the role of healthcare partners in CBEP-HCPs.