{"id":30331,"date":"2012-08-09T08:00:16","date_gmt":"2012-08-09T12:00:16","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.nejm.org\/cardioexchange\/?post_type=expert-is-in&p=30331"},"modified":"2012-07-09T12:30:43","modified_gmt":"2012-07-09T16:30:43","slug":"go-for-a-walk-can-six-minute-walk-distance-predict-cv-events","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.nejm.org\/cardioexchange\/2012\/08\/09\/go-for-a-walk-can-six-minute-walk-distance-predict-cv-events\/","title":{"rendered":"Go For a Walk: Can Six-Minute-Walk Distance Predict CV Events?"},"content":{"rendered":"

In this post, Alexis Beatty discusses her Archives of Internal Medicine study<\/a>, which found that the Six Minute Walk Test (6MWT) improves risk prediction in people with stable coronary heart disease (CHD). CardioExchange’s John Ryan follows up with questions for Beatty about the test.<\/em><\/p>\n

We have a number of simple tools for predicting risk of a first CHD event. However, our arsenal of tools for predicting risk of secondary events in patients with stable CHD is not as well-stocked. In our recent <\/em>study we investigated whether the 6MWT \u2014 a simple test of functional exercise capacity measuring the distance a person can walk in six minutes\u00a0\u2014 could predict cardiovascular events in a cohort of 556 outpatients with stable CHD enrolled in the Heart and Soul Study<\/a>, a prospective cohort study at the San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center and University of California, San Francisco.<\/p>\n

Those who walked the shortest distance in six minutes (87\u2013419 m) were significantly more likely to have a cardiovascular event (myocardial infarction, heart failure, or death) than those who walked the longest distance in six minutes (544\u2013837 m; 62% vs. 22%). When we compared the improvement in risk prediction with the\u00a06MWT to the improvement in risk prediction with Treadmill Exercise Capacity, we found that the tests were comparable. Thus, the 6MWT may be a simple, inexpensive, and useful tool for determining prognosis in outpatients with stable CHD.<\/p>\n

While the results may not be immediately generalizable to all populations (our study had mostly males and we only performed the\u00a06MWT in participants who thought they could walk for six minutes without symptoms), they suggest the potential for the\u00a06MWT to be employed in clinical practice. Also, it would be interesting to see if improving the distance achieved during the 6MWT over time would result in better outcomes.<\/p>\n

Ryan:<\/strong> What limited the patients from walking further during their 6MWT test? If they developed fatigue or dyspnea, how confident are we that these symptoms were not an anginal equivalent in this population with stable CHD?<\/p>\n

Beatty:<\/strong> Participants who did not think that they could walk for six minutes without having symptoms such as dyspnea or chest pain were not administered the 6MWT in our study. Few patients were limited by chest pain, shortness of breath, or musculoskeletal pain. It is possible that symptoms experienced with a walking test could be an anginal equivalent.<\/p>\n

Ryan:<\/strong> Under what circumstances would you recommend a patient with stable CHD be referred for the 6MWT instead of standard stress testing?<\/p>\n

Beatty:<\/strong> If the goal is to determine prognosis or functional exercise capacity in a stable patient, then the 6MWT may be preferrable to standard stress testing. If the goal is to diagnose ischemia, standard stress testing would be appropriate and the\u00a06MWT would not be recommended.<\/p>\n

Would you perform the\u00a06MWT in your outpatients with stable CHD?<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In this post, Alexis Beatty discusses her Archives of Internal Medicine study, which found that the Six Minute Walk Test (6MWT) improves risk prediction in people with stable coronary heart disease (CHD). CardioExchange’s John Ryan follows up with questions for Beatty about the test. We have a number of simple tools for predicting risk of […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":604,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[1322,1346,940],"class_list":["post-30331","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-general","tag-exercise-test","tag-six-minute-walk-test","tag-stable-cad"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.nejm.org\/cardioexchange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/30331","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.nejm.org\/cardioexchange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.nejm.org\/cardioexchange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.nejm.org\/cardioexchange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/604"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.nejm.org\/cardioexchange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=30331"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.nejm.org\/cardioexchange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/30331\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.nejm.org\/cardioexchange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=30331"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.nejm.org\/cardioexchange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=30331"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.nejm.org\/cardioexchange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=30331"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}