3-minute step test results for 12 years old

Home > Fitness Testing > Tests > Home Tests > Step Test

Table of Contents Show

Measurement
How did you go?

This simple test is designed to assess your cardiovascular endurance.

Equipment

A 12 inch high bench (or a similar sized stair or sturdy box), a watch for timing minutes.

Step on and off the box for three minutes. Step up with one foot and then the other. Step down with one foot followed by the other foot. Try to maintain a steady four beat cycle. It's easy to maintain if you say "up, up, down, down". Go at a steady and consistent pace. This is a basic step test procedure - see also other step tests.

Measurement

At the end of three minutes, remain standing while you immediately check your heart rate. Take your pulse for one minute (e.g. count the total beats from 3 to 4 minutes after starting the test). Go here for more information about measuring your heart rate.

How did you go?

The lower your heart rate is after the test, the fitter you are. Compare your heart rate results to the table below. Remember, these scores are based on doing the tests as described, and may not be accurate if the test is modified at all. This home step test is based loosely on the Canadian Home Fitness Test and the results below are also based from data collected from performing this test. Don't worry too much about how you rate - just try and improve your own score.

3-Minute Step Test (Men) - Heart Rate

Age	18-25	26-35	36-45	46-55	56-65	65+
Excellent	<79	<81	<83	<87	<86	<88
Good	79-89	81-89	83-96	87-97	86-97	88-96
Above Average	90-99	90-99	97-103	98-105	98-103	97-103
Average	100-105	100-107	104-112	106-116	104-112	104-113
Below Average	106-116	108-117	113-119	117-122	113-120	114-120
Poor	117-128	118-128	120-130	123-132	121-129	121-130
Very Poor	>128	>128	>130	>132	>129	>130

3-Minute Step Test (Women) - Heart Rate

Age	18-25	26-35	36-45	46-55	56-65	65+
Excellent	<85	<88	<90	<94	<95	<90
Good	85-98	88-99	90-102	94-104	95-104	90-102
Above Average	99-108	100-111	103-110	105-115	105-112	103-115
Average	109-117	112-119	111-118	116-120	113-118	116-122
Below Average	118-126	120-126	119-128	121-129	119-128	123-128
Poor	127-140	127-138	129-140	130-135	129-139	129-134
Very Poor	>140	>138	>140	>135	>139	>134

Download your free copy of the Home Fitness Testing Manual — a guide for you to plan, conduct, analyze and interpret fitness testing at home.

Any comments, suggestions, or corrections? Please let us know.

Access through your institution

Volume 80, November 2021, 100833

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resmer.2021.100833Get rights and content

The level of physical fitness during childhood and adolescence is associated to the risk of obesity, cardiovascular diseases, and the musculoskeletal and mental health. It can be assessed by the functional exercise capacity [1]. Moreover, various physical exercise programs improved the functional exercise capacity in paediatric patients with obesity or chronic cardiac or respiratory diseases, such as cystic fibrosis, asthma or bronchopulmonary dysplasia [2], [3], [4], [5]. As recommended by the American Thoracic Society and the European Respiratory Society (ATS and ERS, respectively) in the statement about pulmonary rehabilitation, the evaluation of the functional exercise capacity is mandatory in this context [6].

The cardiopulmonary exercise test is the gold standard to assess the physical capacity [1]. However, taking into account the barriers related to the cardiopulmonary exercise test, field tests are useful because they are simpler to carry out and imply less cost. Out of these, the 6 minute walking test is the most common (6MWT) [7], [8]. It was previously validated in children [9]. Moreover, its psychometric properties were verified and it offers predicted values [7], [10].

Nevertheless, the required long hallway, the inability to walk and the necessity for some hospitalized patients to stay in a room are barriers for this test. Some other field tests have therefore been proposed such as the step tests and the sit-to-stand-test (STST) [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18]. Conversely to the STST, little attention was paid to the step test in children [17]. The step test measures how many times someone can step on and off a stair in a fixed time. A study failed to validate the 6 minute step test (6MST) as a surrogate to the 6MWT in children from 6 to 12 years old and the authors concluded that the first one was more demanding [13]. By reducing the duration of this test, we hypothesized that the correlation between the number of steps that an individual can perform and the distance walked during the 6MWT could be improved. This is supported by the results of a study performed in stable patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease showing that the 3 minute step test (3MST) was an alternative to the 6MWT [14].

The purpose of this study was to verify if the 3MST is a valid tool to measure the functional exercise capacity in healthy children from 6 to 12 years old. The secondary aim of the study was to analyse if there is a learning effect when the 3MST is performed.

Children between 6 and 12 years old were recruited in the Axular Lizeoa school of San Sebastian (Gipuzkoa, Spain), between the 13th and 15th of January, 2020. The inclusion criteria were to be student of primary education and to be between 6 and 12 years old. The exclusion criteria were to have a diagnosis of obesity, neurological, pulmonary or cardiac disease, or to have a motor disability, based on a parents questionnaire.

The experiment was previously approved by the Institutional Medical

Out of the 134 children that were eligible for the study, 30 were randomly recruited. All the subjects completed all the 3 tests (Fig. 1). Demographic parameters of the children are displayed in Table 1. There were no differences between the individuals from Groups 1 and 2. The walked distance was 649.8 ± 76.7 metres (107.8 ± 8.47% of the predicted value) and the number of steps was 124 ± 30.

This study demonstrated that the 6MWT and the 3MST are feasible in children from 6 to 12 years old, and that the number of steps performed during the 3MST is very strongly associated to the walked distance during the 6MWT and highly reliable. This means that the 3MST is a valid test to estimate and to follow the functional exercise capacity in children of this age range. However, based on the cardiorespiratory response, the 3MST is twice more demanding than the 6MWT. Besides that, it was

In conclusion, the 3MST is valid and feasible in children between 6 and 12 years old. The strong association between the number of steps during the 3MST and the walked distance during the 6MWT means that the 3MST can be a surrogate in healthy children population to assess the functional exercise capacity. Besides that, a learning effect was observed, justifying the need for a training test. Additionally, there is a need for further studies to assess the responsiveness and the minimal clinically

Amaia Iturain Barrón: literature search, data collection, study design, analysis of data, manuscript preparation.

Salvador Quintana Riera: analysis of data, review of manuscript.

Grégory Reychler: analysis of data, review of manuscript.

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

The authors declare that they have no competing interest.

The authors are grateful for all the volunteers, their parents or guardians and the school Axular Lizeoa who kindly accepted to participate in the study. In addition, they are thankful for all the help with the logistics on the sample collection provided by teacher Jose Ramón.

N. Morales Mestre et al.
G. Reychler et al.
C.H. da Costa et al.
S. Solway et al.
S. Beggs et al.
N. Morales Mestre et al.
A. García-Hermoso et al.
T. Takken et al.
T. Radtke et al.
M.A. Spruit et al.

S.J. Singh et al.

A.M. Li et al.

C.F. Mylius et al.

J.F. Arcuri et al.

Residents in respiratory medicine are often confronted with breaking bad news to patients. In communication skill training, a recurring question is whether to use standardized or peer-played patients for simulation
In this prospective single-center crossover study in pulmonology residents, a range of scenarios were performed during training sessions using standardized or peer-played patients. The aim was to assess whether patient type did alter the quality of the role-play. The residents completed post-scenario questionnaires about the role-play of each scenario, but also pre- and post-session questionnaires about their perception of the effectiveness of both modalities, and pre- and post-testing questionnaires about the psychological impact of the training.

Collectively, 4 scenarios were performed 52 times and evaluated 208 times by 52 residents. The use of standardized patients appeared to improve the quality of the patient role (8.8 ± 1.0 vs. 8.3 ± 1.1; p = 0.001) and the general quality of role-play (8.8 ± 1.0 vs. 8.2 ± 0.9; p = 0.008), without affecting the quality of the physician role played by the resident. There were no significant differences between standardized and peer-played patients regarding learning interest or psychological impact. Regardless of the modality, the training sessions did appear to significantly affect the residents' evaluations of their ability to break bad news to patients (5.7 ± 1.1 vs. 7.4 ± 1.1; p < 10-4).
Our results did not point to a superiority of either of these modalities for learning how to break bad news. Both may be used, depending on the local resources.
COPD is underdiagnosed and is projected to be the third cause of death in 2030. However, recent reviews do not recommend screening for COPD in the general population.
We conducted a prospective study to assess the feasibility of implementing COPD screening in a high-risk COPD population, with the help of various healthcare professionals (General practitioners, pharmacists, dentists, physiotherapists, and nurses). Participants filled out a questionnaire, performed a spirometry (COPD6™) and counselling was performed, including smoking cessation and chest physician referral. Participants were contacted at two months to evaluate the effect of the intervention.
Between April 7th, 2017 and July 30th, 2018, 157 participants filled out the questionnaires, performed spirometry and were contacted at two months. Thirty-five out of 157 (22% [95% CI, 15.8-28.8]) participants were detected with an airflow obstruction (FEV1/FEV6 < 0.7), using COPD6™ device. At the two-month-contact, 68 participants (43%, [95%CI 35.5-51.1]) were engaged in a smoking cessation program and 22 (14% [95 % CI, 8.6-19.4]) reported having quit smoking.
This pilot study suggested that a predefined screening of COPD by different healthcare professionals could be implemented in primary care and might be part of counselling for smoking cessation (NCT03104348 on ClinicalTrials.gov).
Phase III clinical trials have demonstrated the merits of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with EGFR-activating mutations. Using a cohort of unselected patients treated with erlotinib, we sought to further describe patient and tumour characteristics, and to evaluate their progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).
Overall, 44 pulmonologists included patients with the required characteristics as follows: Stage IIIB-IV NSCLC, EGFR-activating mutation, age ≥ 18 years, and having to start erlotinib therapy or receiving erlotinib therapy as the first-line TKI, regardless of treatment-line. The analyses were performed using R software, with survival rates calculated according to the Kaplan–Meier method.
A total of 177 patients, aged 72 years on average, were enrolled over a 2-year period. The cohort included 123 women (69.5%), 158 Caucasians (89.3%), 112 non-smokers (63.2%), and 167 adenocarcinomas (94.3%), at either stage IIIB (21) or IV (156), with a good performance status (PS 0–1, 127). Overall, 40 exhibited brain metastases at baseline (22.6%), while 75 had undergone earlier treatment (42.4%). Median PFS was 11.7 months and OS 25.8 months, with respectively a 1-year rate of 48.6% and 74%. The risk of death correlated with ECOG status (PS = 2, HR = 4.48, P < 0.001) but not with brain metastasis (HR = 1.67, P = 0.278).
This study has confirmed erlotinib's efficacy and safety for unselected patients, with PFS and OS comparable to those obtained in phase III trials.
Inhaled short-acting β2-adrenergic agonists can rarely elicit paradoxical bronchospasm (PB), which may be fatal. The purpose to this study was to determine whether post-bronchodilator PB is reported in spirometry test results of veterans with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) or asthma followed at the Jesse Brown Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center in Chicago between 2017-2020. Eighteen of 1,150 test reports reviewed were identified with post-bronchodilator PB (1.5%).12 out of the 18 identified patients with PB had COPD, 4 hadasthma and 2 had asthma/COPD. No report alluded to post-bronchodilator PB. Among the identified PB patients, there were 17 males and one female, 14 African Americans, 3 Caucasian and one Latinx, aged 67±8 years (mean±SD) with BMI 28±5 kg/m2. Thirteen were ex-tobacco smokers, 4 current smokers and one never smoked. Most recent chest CT revealed emphysema in 8 veterans with COPD and bronchial wall thickening in 3. Chest radiographs of 4 veterans with asthma were unremarkable. All veterans were treated with inhaled β2-adrenergic agonists. Five were treated with cardio selective beta1 blockers and 10 for gastroesophageal reflux disease. Eleven veterans were diagnosed with obstructive sleep apnea. In 12 veterans, inhaled albuterol (4 actuations)-induced decrease in FEV1 was 22±8% and 367±167 mL from baseline. In 6 veterans, only FVC decreased significantly from baseline (14±3% and 448±179 mL). No veteran reported respiratory symptoms during or after spirometry testing. Two veterans died during follow-up. Based on spirometry test reports, inhaled β2-adrenergic agonists were discontinued in 2 veterans with COPD and asthma. We propose that post-bronchodilator PB observed during spirometry testing of veterans should be recognized and reported, and its possible clinical implications addressed accordingly.