Normative Data for Gait Speed and Height Norm Speed in ≥ 60-Year-Old Men and Women

Abstract

Purpose

To determine normative data for gait speed and height-normalized gait speed in community-dwelling older men and women.

Materials and Methods

In this cross-sectional study, we recruited 565 men and women aged ≥60 years old. Age was calculated from the date of birth and further classified into four categories: (1) 60–65 years, (2) 66–70 years, (3) 71–75 years and (4) ≥76 years. Gait speed was assessed by a pressure platform (ZEBRIS, Munich, Germany) in meters per second (m/s). Height and weight were objectively measured. Height-normalized gait speed was calculated by dividing gait speed by height. We created the 20th, 40th, 60th and 80th percentile curves for both outcome measures using Cole’s Lambda (L), Mu (M) and Sigma (S) method.

Results

Mean gait speed and height-normalized gait speed was 1.24 (standard deviation 0.28) and 0.75 (0.17). Significant age-related decline in gait speed for both sexes was observed (p < 0.001). Being a woman (β = - 0.09, p < 0.001), being older (β = - 0.02, p < 0.001) and having higher body mass index values (β = - 0.02, p < 0.001) were significantly associated with slower gait speed.

Conclusion

Gait speed significantly declines with age in both older men and women. Providing normative data can be used in screening and monitoring “slow” walkers to prevent from foot pain and higher risk of falls.

Keywords:

• walking
• elderly
• standards
• ageing

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank all the study participants for their enthusiastic participation in the study.

Data Sharing Statement

All the data are freely available upon reasonable request from the corresponding author.

Ethics Approval

Approved by the University of Zagreb and Ethical Committee of the Faculty of Kinesiology.

Consent to Participate

Written consent was obtained.

Author Contributions

All authors made substantial contributions to conception and design, acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; took part in drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; agreed to submit to the current journal; gave final approval of the version to be published; and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Disclosure

The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.