The purpose of this study was to determine and compare the effects of walking with aids on walking speed and some selected cardiovascular parameters.
The results of this study showed that walking with the 3 different aids by the elderly promoted reduction in walking speed when compared with walking with no aid. It is believed that one of the reasons for this is that the participants did not use these walking aids habitually and it was their first experience walking with these aids. This could have been avoided by the introduction of a period of adaptation to the walking aids.
This finding is consistent with the results of a study by Foley et al. (
16), involving 10 healthy adults where the comparison was made between walking with a cane and unassisted walking. There was an apparent decrease in walking speed when the cane was used. The current study also support the results of the study carried out by Cubo et al. (
17), where the comparison was made using a standard walker, wheeled walker, and unassisted ambulation in elderly patients with Parkinson’s disease, who had motor blocks or freezing while walking. Walking speed was significantly reduced for subjects using either assistive devices compared with the unassisted ambulation. Participants in this study, in contrast, did not have any neurologic conditions yet had reduced walking speed with all of the 3 different walking aids used.
From the results of this study, the greatest increase in cardiovascular parameters vis -a -vis systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and heart rate was observed, when walking with a walking frame was compared with the 2 other walking aids and unassisted ambulation. This increase may be attributed to the fact that walking with a walking frame requires the user to use both upper extremities to completely lift up the frame with each step and move it forward, thereby placing greater demand on the cardiovascular and musculoskeletal systems and can easily result in fatigue when compared with the other 2 types of walking aids used. This is in support of the findings of Foley et al. (
16), where systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and heart rate were higher during ambulation with a standard walking frame as compared with unassisted ambulation and ambulation with a walking cane. This is also in agreement with the findings of Holder et al. (
18), where it was reported that the use of assistive devices, which involved using axillary crutches, a standard walking frame, and a wheeled walking frame among 9 female physical therapists resulted in an increase in metabolic and cardiovascular responses compared with unassisted ambulation. They also stated that it is possible that the differences in metabolic and cardiovascular parameters may be more pronounced in an older population because of secondary changes in the cardiovascular system due to the aging process as well as cardiovascular disease in the older population.
From the findings of this study, the use of the tripod resulted in reduced systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and heart rate while the use of the walking cane resulted in reduced systolic blood pressure and increased heart rate, while the diastolic blood pressure remained unchanged when compared with unassisted ambulation. This may be possibly due to the fact that the use of a tripod provided an additional base of support thereby increasing dependence on the tripod and thus reducing the magnitude of the demands placed on the musculoskeletal and cardiovascular systems when compared with a walking cane.
Similar to the findings of Foley et al. (
16), the results of this study showed that there was no significant difference in heart rate when walking with a walking cane was compared with walking unaided. This is contrary to the findings of Jones et al. (
19) where the comparison was made between cane-assisted gait and unassisted walking in patients with knee osteoarthritis, where it was found that heart rate was higher when walking with a walking cane was compared with walking unaided.
4.1. Limitations of This Study
The sample size was quite small. The participants of this study could walk without walking aids, therefore, they did not represent the typical population in need of such devices. Also, the participants had only a short time of training before using each walking aid.
4.2. Conclusion
Walking with walking aids had a significant effect on walking speed (WS) in the elderly. Walking with walking aids did not have any effect on the cardiovascular parameters (systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and heart rate) in the elderly. Walking frame ambulation elicited a higher blood pressure and HR and a slower WS than cane and tripod ambulation, respectively. The elderly individuals walked significantly faster with a cane than tripod and walking frame in this study.
4.3. Recommendation
Based on the outcome of this study, the following recommendations were made:
It is recommended that when walking aids are being prescribed for elderly patients as a result of an underlying pathology, physiotherapists should periodically assess their walking speed, and their cardiovascular parameters, which is an indicator of health and function, to establish the short and long-term effects of using aids on the overall health of the patient.