TY - JOUR
T1 - How fast is fast enough? Walking cadence (steps/min) as a practical estimate of intensity in adults
T2 - A narrative review
AU - Tudor-Locke, Catrine
AU - Han, Ho
AU - Aguiar, Elroy J.
AU - Barreira, Tiago V.
AU - Schuna, John M.
AU - Kang, Minsoo
AU - Rowe, David A.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article). All rights reserved.
PY - 2018/6
Y1 - 2018/6
N2 - Background Cadence (steps/min) may be a reasonable proxy-indicator of ambulatory intensity. A summary of current evidence is needed for cadence-based metrics supporting benchmark (standard or point of reference) and threshold (minimums associated with desired outcomes) values that are informed by a systematic process. Objective To review how fast, in terms of cadence, is enough, with reference to crafting public health recommendations in adults. Methods A comprehensive search strategy was conducted to identify relevant studies focused on walking cadence and intensity for adults. Identifed studies (n=38) included controlled (n=11), free-living observational (n=18) and intervention (n=9) designs. Results There was a strong relationship between cadence (as measured by direct observation and objective assessments) and intensity (indirect calorimetry). Despite acknowledged interindividual variability, =100 steps/min is a consistent heuristic (e.g, evidence-based, rounded) value associated with absolutely defned moderate intensity (3 metabolic equivalents (METs)). Epidemiological studies report notably low mean daily cadences (ie, 7.7 steps/min), shaped primarily by the very large proportion of time (13.5 hours/day) spent between zero and purposeful cadences (<60 steps/min) at the population level. Published values for peak 1-min and 30-min cadences in healthy free-living adults are >100 and >70 steps/min, respectively. Peak cadence indicators are negatively associated with increased age and body mass index. Identifed intervention studies used cadence to either prescribe and/or quantify ambulatory intensity but the evidence is best described as preliminary. Conclusions A cadence value of =100 steps/min in adults appears to be a consistent and reasonable heuristic answer to 'How fast is fast enough?' during sustained and rhythmic ambulatory behaviour.
AB - Background Cadence (steps/min) may be a reasonable proxy-indicator of ambulatory intensity. A summary of current evidence is needed for cadence-based metrics supporting benchmark (standard or point of reference) and threshold (minimums associated with desired outcomes) values that are informed by a systematic process. Objective To review how fast, in terms of cadence, is enough, with reference to crafting public health recommendations in adults. Methods A comprehensive search strategy was conducted to identify relevant studies focused on walking cadence and intensity for adults. Identifed studies (n=38) included controlled (n=11), free-living observational (n=18) and intervention (n=9) designs. Results There was a strong relationship between cadence (as measured by direct observation and objective assessments) and intensity (indirect calorimetry). Despite acknowledged interindividual variability, =100 steps/min is a consistent heuristic (e.g, evidence-based, rounded) value associated with absolutely defned moderate intensity (3 metabolic equivalents (METs)). Epidemiological studies report notably low mean daily cadences (ie, 7.7 steps/min), shaped primarily by the very large proportion of time (13.5 hours/day) spent between zero and purposeful cadences (<60 steps/min) at the population level. Published values for peak 1-min and 30-min cadences in healthy free-living adults are >100 and >70 steps/min, respectively. Peak cadence indicators are negatively associated with increased age and body mass index. Identifed intervention studies used cadence to either prescribe and/or quantify ambulatory intensity but the evidence is best described as preliminary. Conclusions A cadence value of =100 steps/min in adults appears to be a consistent and reasonable heuristic answer to 'How fast is fast enough?' during sustained and rhythmic ambulatory behaviour.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85049165654&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85049165654&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1136/bjsports-2017-097628
DO - 10.1136/bjsports-2017-097628
M3 - Review article
C2 - 29858465
AN - SCOPUS:85049165654
SN - 0306-3674
VL - 52
SP - 776
EP - 788
JO - British journal of sports medicine
JF - British journal of sports medicine
IS - 12
ER -