2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2013.03.039
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Development and evaluation of the Walking Estimated-Limitation Calculated by History questionnaire in patients with claudication

Abstract: The WELCH questionnaire is a simple tool to estimate walking limitation in patients with suspected peripheral artery disease. It is easily scored by mental calculation. It may help to standardize the estimation of walking limitation in routine clinical practice.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

7
30
0
3

Year Published

2014
2014
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(40 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
7
30
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…9 It is also consistent with our previous observation in another population where the Pearson r coefficient of correlation of the WELCH with MWT was 0.65. 3 The non-Gaussian-type distributions observed in Fig. 3 are consistent with previously reported results.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…9 It is also consistent with our previous observation in another population where the Pearson r coefficient of correlation of the WELCH with MWT was 0.65. 3 The non-Gaussian-type distributions observed in Fig. 3 are consistent with previously reported results.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…10 Thus, we recently proposed the WELCH, which is based on the first three items of the EACH-Q and uses the usual walking speed item (with answers slightly changed), and, overall, uses an empirical, completely new, and very simple scoring method that can be calculated mentally without need of a computer. 3 The present study is the latest step in this development process. The correlations between WELCH score and treadmill results observed in this study (ranging from 0.58 to 0.60) in a large group of patients are consistent, but at the high end of the expected range of results previously reported with disease-specific tools.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 93%
See 3 more Smart Citations