How fast is fast enough? Walking cadence (steps/min) as a practical estimate of intensity in adults: a narrative review

Abstract

BackgroundCadence (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.ObjectiveTo review how fast, in terms of cadence, is enough, with reference to crafting public health recommendations in adults.MethodsA comprehensive search strategy was conducted to identify relevant studies focused on walking cadence and intensity for adults. Identified studies (n=38) included controlled (n=11), free-living observational (n=18) and intervention (n=9) designs.ResultsThere 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 defined 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. Identified intervention studies used cadence to either prescribe and/or quantify ambulatory intensity but the evidence is best described as preliminary.ConclusionsA 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.Trial registration numberNCT02650258

A data-driven, meaningful, easy to interpret, population-independent accelerometer outcome variable for global surveillance

“…With this approach the metric is population-independent and derived from directly measured acceleration, thus not relying on assumptions as cut-points do 9 , and the intensity is captured regardless of level of activity with no person scoring zero. This bears similarities to the peak 30 min walking cadence (steps/min) proposed by Tudor-Locke and colleagues 13 as a practical estimate of activity intensity.…”

Cadence From Physical Activity Trackers for Monitoring of Home‐Based Exercise Intensity in Advanced Liver Disease

“…Cadence or per-minute steps has been proposed as a method to monitor exercise intensity, and it can be obtained with personal activity trackers (PATs). (3) Although heart rate reserve (HRR)-percentage increase from resting heart rate (HR rest ) to maximum heart rate (HR max )is recommended to identify moderate-intensity exercise, (2) it has not been evaluated in patients with ESLD nor has it been compared with cadence. In this study, we aimed to test the agreement between cadence, HRR, and a PAT-proprietary algorithm and to evaluate the optimal methods of measuring exercise intensity in ESLD patients as part of a home-based physical activity program (HB-PAP) randomized pilot trial.…”

What Hippocrates called ‘Man’s best medicine’: walking is humanity’s path to a better world

“…This Special Issue includes three extended editorials,3–5 three systematic reviews6–8 (including one meta-analysis6), one narrative review, one scoping review9 and one individual participant pooled analysis 10. World Health Organization Program Leader Fiona Bull and the co-author of the 1997 review Adrianne Hardman3 provide the historical context.…”

“…In other words, is ‘more or faster (walking) the better’ for cardiovascular health? Tutor-Locke and colleagues9 address the issue of cadence: how many steps per minute is ‘enough’ for health benefits? Based on a review of controlled, epidemiological and intervention studies, the authors9 propose a cadence that corresponds to moderate intensity physical activity for most adults; this cadence threshold will be of great value to public health and clinical recommendations.…”

“…Tutor-Locke and colleagues9 address the issue of cadence: how many steps per minute is ‘enough’ for health benefits? Based on a review of controlled, epidemiological and intervention studies, the authors9 propose a cadence that corresponds to moderate intensity physical activity for most adults; this cadence threshold will be of great value to public health and clinical recommendations. But since counting steps could be an arduous task for many, the question remains—Does self-rated (eg, slow, average, fast) walking pace associate with long-term indicators of health such as all-cause, cardiovascular disease–related and cancer mortality risk?…”