Background and Purpose— The amount of task-specific stepping practice provided during rehabilitation poststroke can influence locomotor recovery and reflects one aspect of exercise dose that can affect the efficacy of specific interventions. Emerging data suggest that markedly increasing the intensity and variability of stepping practice may also be critical, although such strategies are discouraged during traditional rehabilitation. The goal of this study was to determine the individual and combined contributions of intensity and variability of stepping practice to improving walking speed and distance in individuals poststroke. Methods— This phase 2, randomized, blinded assessor clinical trial was performed between May 2015 and November 2018. Individuals between 18 and 85 years old with hemiparesis poststroke of >6 months duration were recruited. Of the 152 individuals screened, 97 were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 training groups, with 90 completing >10 sessions. Interventions consisted of either high-intensity stepping (70%–80% heart rate reserve) of variable, difficult stepping tasks (high variable), high-intensity stepping performing only forward walking (high forward), and low-intensity stepping in variable contexts at 30% to 40% heart rate reserve (low variable). Participants received up to 30 sessions over 2 months, with testing at baseline, post-training, and a 3-month follow-up. Primary outcomes included walking speeds and timed distance, with secondary measures of dynamic balance, transfers, spatiotemporal kinematics, and metabolic measures. Results— All walking gains were significantly greater following either high-intensity group versus low-variable training (all P <0.001) with significant correlations with stepping amount and rate ( r =0.48–60; P <0.01). Additional gains in spatiotemporal symmetry were observed with high-intensity training, and balance confidence increased only following high-variable training in individuals with severe impairments. Conclusions— High-intensity stepping training resulted in greater improvements in walking ability and gait symmetry than low-intensity training in individuals with chronic stroke, with potential greater improvements in balance confidence. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT02507466.

Background Many physical interventions can improve locomotor function in individuals with motor incomplete spinal cord injury (iSCI), although the training parameters that maximize recovery are not clear. Previous studies in individuals with other neurologic injuries suggest the intensity of locomotor training (LT) may positively influence walking outcomes. However, the effects of intensity during training of individuals with iSCI have not been tested. Objective The purpose of this pilot, blinded-assessor randomized trial was to evaluate the effects of LT intensity on walking outcomes in individuals with iSCI. Methods Using a crossover design, ambulatory participants with iSCI > 1 year duration performed either high- or low-intensity LT for ≤ 20 sessions over 4–6 weeks. Four weeks following completion, the training interventions were alternated. Targeted intensities focused on achieving specific ranges of heart rate (HR) or ratings of perceived exertion (RPE), with intensity manipulated by increasing speeds or applying loads. Results Significantly greater increases in peak treadmill speeds (0.18 vs 0.02 m/s) and secondary measures of metabolic function and overground speed were observed following high- vs low-intensity training, with no effects of intervention order. Moderate to high correlations were observed between differences in walking speed or distances and differences in HRs or RPEs during high- vs low-intensity training. Conclusion This pilot study provides the first evidence that the intensity of stepping practice may be an important determinant of LT outcomes in individuals with iSCI. Whether such training is feasible in larger patient populations and contributes to improved locomotor outcomes deserves further consideration. Clinical Trial Registration-URL https://clinicaltrials.gov/; Unique Identifier: NCT02115685

Background and Purpose:We addressed questions about the potential discrepancy between improvements in activity capacity and improvements in activity performance in daily life. We asked whether this discrepancy is:1. Common in routine, outpatient care, or an artifact of intervention studies? 2. Unique to upper limb (UL) rehabilitation, or is it seen in walking rehabilitation too? 3. Only seen in persons with stroke, or a broader neurorehabilitation problem? Methods: A longitudinal, observational cohort of 156 participants with stroke or Parkinson disease (PD) receiving outpatient rehabilitation at 5 clinics was assessed around admission and monthly Program in Physical Therapy (C.