Current data confirm that the 6MWT , ISWT and ESWT are valid , reliable and responsive to change with some interventions .
However , results are sensitive to small changes in methodology .
Field walking tests are commonly employed to evaluate exercise capacity , assess prognosis and evaluate treatment response in chronic respiratory diseases .
In recent years , there has been a wealth of new literature pertinent to the conduct of the 6-min walk test ( 6MWT ) , and a growing evidence base describing the incremental and endurance shuttle walk tests ( ISWT and ESWT , respectively ) .
The aim of this document is to describe the st and ard operating procedures for the 6MWT , ISWT and ESWT , which can be consistently employed by clinicians and research ers .
Modifying track layout from straight to circular has a modest effect on the 6-min walk distance.
BACKGROUND The protocol used for the 6-min walk test ( 6MWT ) influences its results . The only study to examine the effect of modifying track layout performed a retrospective analysis and concluded that institutions using continuous tracks yield greater distances than those using straight tracks . Agreement between the distances measured on different tracks could not be examined . We evaluated the effect of modifying track layout on walk distance and examined the agreement and repeatability of distances measured on different tracks . METHODS In a prospect i ve , r and omized , cross-over study , 27 COPD subjects ( FEV(1 ) , 38 + /- 14 % [ mean + /- SD ] ; 15 men ) attended three separate test sessions , completing six 6MWTs . To familiarize all subjects with both tracks , the first two sessions comprised two 6MWTs on either a circular or straight track . During the final session , each subject was tested once on the straight and once on the circular track . RESULTS The distance walked on the circular track exceeded the straight track by 13 + /- 17 m ( p < 0.001 ) . The limit of agreement between tracks was 33 m. Coefficient of repeatability values when the test was completed on different days for the straight and circular tracks were 51 m and 65 m , respectively . CONCLUSIONS When evaluating changes in 6-min walk distance in groups of patients , track layout should be st and ardized . However , the effect of modifying track layout on an individual 's walking distance is small compared to their daily variability in walk distance . Therefore , st and ardizing track layout for any given individual may be inconsequential when evaluating the change in distances from tests performed on different days
Current data confirm that the 6MWT , ISWT and ESWT are valid , reliable and responsive to change with some interventions .
However , results are sensitive to small changes in methodology .
Field walking tests are commonly employed to evaluate exercise capacity , assess prognosis and evaluate treatment response in chronic respiratory diseases .
In recent years , there has been a wealth of new literature pertinent to the conduct of the 6-min walk test ( 6MWT ) , and a growing evidence base describing the incremental and endurance shuttle walk tests ( ISWT and ESWT , respectively ) .
The aim of this document is to describe the st and ard operating procedures for the 6MWT , ISWT and ESWT , which can be consistently employed by clinicians and research ers .