Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Advertisement

Scientific Reports
  • View all journals
  • Search
  • My Account Login
  • Content Explore content
  • About the journal
  • Publish with us
  • Sign up for alerts
  • RSS feed
  1. nature
  2. scientific reports
  3. articles
  4. article
Comparing hemodynamic and cardiorespiratory responses during six-minute walk and step tests in mild acute COVID-19
Download PDF
Download PDF
  • Article
  • Open access
  • Published: 23 February 2026

Comparing hemodynamic and cardiorespiratory responses during six-minute walk and step tests in mild acute COVID-19

  • Aldair Darlan Santos-de-Araújo1,2,
  • Daniela Bassi-Dibai3,4,
  • Renan Shida Marinho1,5,
  • Shane A. Phillips6,7,
  • Ross Arena6,7,8 &
  • …
  • Audrey Borghi-Silva1,5 

Scientific Reports , Article number:  (2026) Cite this article

We are providing an unedited version of this manuscript to give early access to its findings. Before final publication, the manuscript will undergo further editing. Please note there may be errors present which affect the content, and all legal disclaimers apply.

Subjects

  • Cardiology
  • Cardiovascular diseases
  • Diseases
  • Physiology
  • Respiration
  • Respiratory signs and symptoms
  • Respiratory tract diseases
  • Signs and symptoms

Abstract

The six-minute walking test (6MWT) and six-minute step test (6MST) are valuable tools for assessing functional capacity and predicting outcomes in individuals suffering from mild COVID-19. This study aims to evaluate functional capacity and oxygen uptake (\({\dot{\text {V}}}{{\text{O}}_{\text{2}}}\)) during both the 6MWT and 6MST, to examine hemodynamic and cardiorespiratory responses and identify predictive factors influencing performance and \({\dot{\text {V}}}{{\text{O}}_{\text{2}}}\) (mL kg⁻¹ min⁻¹). This is a cross-sectional study including adults with mild COVID-19 symptoms within 6 weeks of a positive RT-PCR test. Participants were assessed for anthropometrics, handgrip strength, physical activity levels, pulmonary function, and performance on the 6MWT/6MST. Cardiorespiratory data were collected using a portable gas analyzer. Statistical analyses were conducted to compare the two tests, and regression models were used to identify predictive factors for performance and \({\dot{\text {V}}}{{\text{O}}_{\text{2}}}\) peak (mL kg⁻¹ min⁻¹). Forty volunteers (57% female) participated, with a mean age of 35 ± 12 years and BMI of 27.55 ± 5.66 kg/m2. Mean 6MWT distance was 473 ± 97 m (82 ± 18% predicted) and mean 6MST was 144 ± 27 steps (81 ± 16% predicted). Significant differences were found in hemodynamic responses with the 6MST eliciting higher heart rate (HR; p < 0.001), systolic blood pressure (SBP; p < 0.001), and ratings of dyspnea and lower limb fatigue on the Borg scale (p < 0.001 and p = 0.015, respectively). (Regression analyses revealed factors that predicted performance and \({\dot{\text {V}}}{{\text{O}}_{\text{2}}}\) peak (mL kg⁻¹ min⁻¹) for both tests, with models explaining 46–59% of variance for the 6MST and 12–40% for the 6MWT. The 6MST and 6MWT elicit distinct physiological responses, with the 6MST imposing greater hemodynamic and cardiorespiratory responses. Pulmonary function and body composition significantly enhance predictive models for functional performance and \({\dot{\text {V}}}{{\text{O}}_{\text{2}}}\) peak (mL kg⁻¹ min⁻¹) in both tests.

Data availability

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  1. Herdy, A. H. et al. Cardiopulmonary exercise test: background, applicability and interpretation. Arq. Bras. Cardiol. 107 (5), 467. https://doi.org/10.5935/ABC.20160171 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Crapo, R. O. et al. ATS statement: guidelines for the six-minute walk test. Am. J. Respir Crit. Care Med. 166 (1), 111–117. https://doi.org/10.1164/AJRCCM.166.1.AT1102 (2002).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Albouaini, K., Egred, M., Alahmar, A. & Wright, D. J. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing and its application. Postgrad. Med. J. 83 (985), 675. https://doi.org/10.1136/HRT.2007.121558 (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Travers, G., Kippelen, P., Trangmar, S. J. & González-Alonso, J. Physiological function during exercise and environmental stress in humans—An integrative view of body systems and homeostasis. Cells 11(3), 383. https://doi.org/10.3390/CELLS11030383 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Dixit, N. M., Churchill, A., Nsair, A. & Hsu, J. J. Post-Acute: COVID-19 Syndrome and the cardiovascular system: what is known? Am. Hear. Hournal Plus Cardiol. Res. Pract. 5, 100025. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AHJO.2021.100025 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Xiong, T. Y., Redwood, S., Prendergast, B. & Chen, M. Coronaviruses and the cardiovascular system: acute and long-term implications. Eur. Heart J. 41(19), 1798. https://doi.org/10.1093/EURHEARTJ/EHAA231 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Santos-de-Araújo, A. D. et al. Impact of COVID-19 on heart rate variability in post-COVID individuals compared to a control group. Sci. Rep. 14(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-82411-w (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Singh, S. J. et al. Respiratory sequelae of COVID-19: pulmonary and extrapulmonary origins, and approaches to clinical care and rehabilitation. Lancet Respir. Med. 11(8), 709–725. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-2600(23)00159-5 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Longobardi, I. et al. Oxygen uptake kinetics and chronotropic responses to exercise are impaired in survivors of severe COVID-19. Am. J. Physiol. Hear. Circ. Physiol. 323 (3), H569. https://doi.org/10.1152/AJPHEART.00291.2022 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Back, G. D. et al. Mild-to-moderate COVID-19 impact on the cardiorespiratory fitness in young and middle-aged populations. Braz. J. Med. Biol. Res. 55, e12118. https://doi.org/10.1590/1414-431X2022E12118 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Gomes-Neto, M. et al. Determinants of cardiorespiratory fitness measured by cardiopulmonary exercise testing in COVID-19 survivors: a systematic review with meta-analysis and meta‑regression. Braz. J. Phys. Ther. 28(4), 101089. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BJPT.2024.101089 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Balady, G. J. et al. Clinician’s guide to cardiopulmonary exercise testing in adults: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 122(2), 191–225. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0B013E3181E52E69 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Amput, P., Tapanya, W., Wongphon, S., Naravejsakul, K. & Sritiyot, T. Test–retest reliability and minimal detectable change of the 6-minute step test and 1-minute sit-to-stand test in post-COVID-19 patients. Adv. Respir. Med. 93(5), 33. https://doi.org/10.3390/ARM93050033 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Omar, A., Ferreira, A., Hegazy, F. A. & Alaparthi, G. K. Cardiorespiratory response to six-minute step test in post COVID-19 patients—A cross sectional study. Healthcare https://doi.org/10.3390/HEALTHCARE11101386 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Marinho, R. S. et al. Reliability and validity of six-minute step test in patients with heart failure. Braz. J. Med. Biol. Res. 54(10), e10514. https://doi.org/10.1590/1414-431X2020E10514 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  16. Munari, A. B. et al. Reproducibility of the 6-min step test in subjects with COPD. Respir. Care 66(2), 292–299. https://doi.org/10.4187/RESPCARE.08096 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  17. Pessoa, B. V. et al. Validity of the six-minute step test of free cadence in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Braz. J. Phys. Ther. 18(3), 228–236. https://doi.org/10.1590/BJPT-RBF.2014.0041 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Salles Albuquerque, V., Dal Corso S. & Pereira do Amaral D, et al. Normative values and reference equation for the six-minute step test to evaluate functional exercise capacity: a multicenter study. Published online. https://doi.org/10.36416/1806-3756/e20210511 (2022).

  19. Arcuri, J. F. et al. Validity and reliability of the 6-minute step test in healthy individuals: a cross-sectional study. Clin. J. Sport Med. 26(1), 69–75. https://doi.org/10.1097/JSM.0000000000000190 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Pepera, G. et al. Tele-assessment of functional capacity through the six-minute walk test in patients with diabetes mellitus type 2: validity and reliability of repeated measurements. Sensors 23(3), 1354. https://doi.org/10.3390/S23031354 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Pouliopoulou, D. V. et al. Rehabilitation interventions for physical capacity and quality of life in adults with post–COVID-19 condition: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Netw. Open 6(9), e2333838. https://doi.org/10.1001/JAMANETWORKOPEN.2023.33838 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Arienti, C. et al. Rehabilitation and COVID-19: systematic review by Cochrane Rehabilitation. Eur. J. Phys. Rehabil. Med. 59(6), 800. https://doi.org/10.23736/S1973-9087.23.08331-4 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  23. Marinho, R. S. et al. Reliability and validity of six-minute step test in patients with heart failure. Braz. J. Med. Biol. Res. https://doi.org/10.1590/1414-431X2020E10514 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Klanidhi, K. et al. Six-minute walk test and its predictability in outcome of COVID-19 patients. J. Educ. Health Promot. 11 (1). https://doi.org/10.4103/JEHP.JEHP_544_21 (2022).

  25. Peroy-Badal, R. et al. Comparison of different field tests to assess the physical capacity of post-COVID-19 patients. Pulmonology 30(1), 17–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PULMOE.2022.07.011 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Peroy-Badal, R. et al. The Chester step test is a reproducible tool to assess exercise capacity and exertional desaturation in post-COVID-19 patients. Healthcare 11(1), 51. https://doi.org/10.3390/HEALTHCARE11010051 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  27. Santos-de-Araújo, A. D. et al. The six-minute step test can predict COPD exacerbations: a 36-month follow-up study. Sci. Rep. 14(1), 3649. https://doi.org/10.1038/S41598-024-54338-9 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  28. Solway, S., Brooks, D., Lacasse, Y. & Thomas, S. A qualitative systematic overview of the measurement properties of functional walk tests used in the cardiorespiratory domain. Chest 119 (1), 256–270. https://doi.org/10.1378/CHEST.119.1.256 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Pereira, D. G. et al. Performance, metabolic, hemodynamic, and perceived exertion in the six-minute step test at different heights in a healthy population of different age groups. Motriz. Rev. Educ. Fis. 27, e10210020520. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1980-657420210020520 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Patel, H. et al. Aerobic vs anaerobic exercise training effects on the cardiovascular system. World J. Cardiol. 9(2), 134. https://doi.org/10.4330/WJC.V9.I2.134 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Dourado, V. Z. et al. Classification of cardiorespiratory fitness using the six-minute walk test in adults: comparison with cardiopulmonary exercise testing. Pulmonology 27(6), 500–508. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PULMOE.2021.03.006 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  32. Mänttäri, A. et al. Six-minute walk test: a tool for predicting maximal aerobic power (VO2 max) in healthy adults. Clin. Physiol. Funct. Imaging 38(6), 1038–1045. https://doi.org/10.1111/CPF.12525 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  33. Malta, M., Cardoso, L. O., Bastos, F. I., Magnanini, M. M. F. & da Silva, C. M. F. P. STROBE initiative: guidelines on reporting observational studies. Rev. Saude Publica 44(3), 559–565. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-89102010000300021 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Cascella, M. et al. Evaluation, and Treatment of Coronavirus (COVID-19). StatPearls. Published online January 9, 2023. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK554776/. Accessed 22 Aug 2023.

  35. McLester, C. N., Nickerson, B. S., Kliszczewicz, B. M. & McLester, J. R. Reliability and agreement of various InBody body composition analyzers as compared to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in healthy men and women. J. Clin. Densitom. 23(3), 443–450. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JOCD.2018.10.008 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  36. Núñez-Cortés, R. et al. Handgrip strength measurement protocols for all-cause and cause-specific mortality outcomes in more than 3 million participants: a systematic review and meta-regression analysis. Clin. Nutr. 41(11), 2473–2489. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CLNU.2022.09.006 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  37. Baecke, J. A. H., Burema, J. & Frijters, J. E. R. A short questionnaire for the measurement of habitual physical activity in epidemiological studies. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 36 (5), 936–942. https://doi.org/10.1093/AJCN/36.5.936 (1982).

    Google Scholar 

  38. Rocha, D. S. et al. The Baecke Habitual Physical Activity Questionnaire (BHPAQ): a valid internal structure of the instrument to assess healthy Brazilian adults. Rev. Assoc. Med. Bras. 68(7), 912–916. https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-9282.20211374 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  39. Bestall, J. C. et al. Usefulness of the Medical Research Council (MRC) dyspnoea scale as a measure of disability in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Thorax 54(7), 581–586. https://doi.org/10.1136/THX.54.7.581 (1999).

    Google Scholar 

  40. Graham, B. L. et al. Standardization of Spirometry 2019 Update. An Official American Thoracic Society and European Respiratory Society Technical Statement. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 200(8), E70–E88. https://doi.org/10.1164/RCCM.201908-1590ST (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  41. Criée, C. P. et al. Body plethysmography–its principles and clinical use. Respir. Med. 105(7), 959–971. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RMED.2011.02.006 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  42. ATS/ERS Statement on respiratory muscle testing. Am. J. Respir Crit. Care Med. 166 (4):518–624. https://doi.org/10.1164/RCCM.166.4.518 (2002).

  43. Neder, J. A., Andreoni, S., Lerario, M. C. & Nery, L. E. Reference values for lung function tests. II. Maximal respiratory pressures and voluntary ventilation. Braz. J. Med. Biol. Res. Rev. Bras. Pesqui medicas e Biol. 32 (6), 719–727. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-879X1999000600007 (1999).

    Google Scholar 

  44. Tanaka, H., Monahan, K. D. & Seals, D. R. Age-predicted maximal heart rate revisited. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 37 (1), 153–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0735-1097(00)01054-8 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  45. Britto, R. R. et al. Reference equations for the six-minute walk distance based on aBrazilian multicenter study. Braz. J. Phys. Ther. 17 (6), 556. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-35552012005000122 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  46. Mishra, P. et al. Descriptive statistics and normality tests for statistical data. Ann. Card. Anaesth. 22(1), 67. https://doi.org/10.4103/ACA.ACA_157_18 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  47. Katz, M. H. Multivariable analysis: a practical guide for clinicians and public health researchers 3rd ed. (Cambridge University Press, 2011). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511974175.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Harrell, F. E. Regression modeling strategies. Published online 2001. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-3462-1

  49. Durbin, J. & Watson, G. Testing for serial correlation in least squares regression. Biometrika 37 (3–4), 409–428 (1950).

    Google Scholar 

  50. Kim, J. H. Multicollinearity and misleading statistical results. Korean J. Anesthesiol. 72(6), 558. https://doi.org/10.4097/KJA.19087 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  51. Schmidt, F. L. The relative efficiency of regression and simple unit predictor weights in applied differential psychology. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 31(3), 699–714. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447103100310 (1971).

    Google Scholar 

  52. Cohen, J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Stat Power Anal Behav Sci. Published online May. 13 https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587 (2013).

  53. Bohannon, R. W., Bubela, D. J., Wang, Y. C., Magasi, S. S. & Gershon, R. C. Six-minute walk test versus three-minute step test for measuring functional endurance (Alternative Measures of Functional Endurance). J. Strength Cond. Res. 29(11), 3240. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000000253 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  54. Beaumont, M. et al. Comparison of 3-minute step test (3MStepT) and 6-minute walk test (6MWT) in patients with COPD. COPD J. Chronic Obstr. Pulm. Dis. 16, 266–271. https://doi.org/10.1080/15412555.2019.1656713 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  55. Oliveros, M. J. et al. Two-minute step test as a complement to six-minute walk test in subjects with treated coronary artery disease. Front. Cardiovasc. Med. https://doi.org/10.3389/FCVM.2022.848589 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  56. Wegrzynowska-Teodorczyk, K. et al. Could the two-minute step test be an alternative to the six-minute walk test for patients with systolic heart failure? Eur. J. Prev. Cardiol. 23 (12), 1307–1313. https://doi.org/10.1177/2047487315625235 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  57. da Costa, C. H. et al. Can we use the 6-minute step test instead of the 6-minute walking test? An observational study. Physiotherapy 103(1), 48–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PHYSIO.2015.11.003 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  58. Carvalho, L. P. et al. Prediction of cardiorespiratory fitness by the six-minute step test and its association with muscle strength and power in sedentary obese and lean young women: a cross-sectional study. PLoS One https://doi.org/10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0145960 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  59. Enrichi, P. L. & Sherrill, D. L. Reference equations for the six-minute walk in healthy adults. https://doi.org/101164/ajrccm15859710086. 158(5 PART I), 1384–1387. https://doi.org/10.1164/AJRCCM.158.5.9710086 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  60. Dourado, V. Z., Vidotto, M. C. & Guerra, R. L. F. Reference equations for the performance of healthy adults on field walking tests. J. Bras. Pneumol. 37(5), 607–614. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1806-37132011000500007 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  61. Andrianopoulos, V. et al. Six-minute walk distance in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: which reference equations should we use? Chron. Respir. Dis. 12 (2), 111–119. https://doi.org/10.1177/1479972315575201/ASSET/IMAGES/LARGE. 10.1177_1479972315575201-FIG4.JPEG (2015).

  62. Deka, P. et al. Predicting maximal oxygen uptake from the 6 min walk test in patients with heart failure. ESC Heart Fail. 8(1), 47–54. https://doi.org/10.1002/EHF2.13167 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  63. Ribeiro-Samora, G. A. et al. Could peak oxygen uptake be estimated from proposed equations based on the six-minute walk test in chronic heart failure subjects?. Braz. J. Phys. Ther. 21(2), 100. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BJPT.2017.03.004 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  64. Jalili, M., Nazem, F., Sazvar, A. & Ranjbar, K. Prediction of maximal oxygen uptake by six-minute walk test and body mass index in healthy boys. J. Pediatr. 200, 155–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JPEDS.2018.04.026 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  65. Appenzeller, P. et al. Prediction of maximal oxygen uptake from 6-min walk test in pulmonary hypertension. ERJ Open Res. https://doi.org/10.1183/23120541.00664-2021 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  66. Dourado, V. Predicting maximum oxygen uptake using the six-minute walk distance in adults: what is the best curve fit estimation?. Pulmonology 31(1), 2413778. https://doi.org/10.1080/25310429.2024.2413778 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  67. Amaral, D. P., José, A., Correia, N. S., Furlanetto, K. C. & Dal Corso, S. Normative values and prediction equations for the modified incremental step test in healthy adults aged 18–83 years. Physiotherapy 122, 40–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PHYSIO.2023.08.004 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  68. Patel, S. et al. The six-minute step test as an exercise outcome in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Ann. Am. Thorac. Soc. 20(3), 476. https://doi.org/10.1513/ANNALSATS.202206-516RL (2023).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

To the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES), National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq), and São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP). To the University Hospital of Federal University of São Carlos - SP-Brazil (HU-UFSCar) Brazilian Company of Hospital Services (EBSERH). Professor Ph.D. Audrey Borghi-Silva is CNPq Research Productivity Scholarship - Level 1B. Professor Daniela Bassi-Dibai is currently a recipient of the Research Productivity Grant from the Foundation for Support of Research and Development in Science and Technology of Maranhão (FAPEMA).

Funding

No funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cardiopulmonary Physical Therapy Laboratory, Physical Therapy Department, Federal University of São Carlos, Rodovia Washington Luiz, São Carlos, SP, 13565-905, Brazil

    Aldair Darlan Santos-de-Araújo, Renan Shida Marinho & Audrey Borghi-Silva

  2. Paranaense University (UNIPAR), Francisco Beltrão, PR, Brazil

    Aldair Darlan Santos-de-Araújo

  3. Department of Dentistry, CEUMA University, São Luís, MA, Brazil

    Daniela Bassi-Dibai

  4. Postgraduate Program in Management in Health Programs and Services, CEUMA University, São Luís, MA, Brazil

    Daniela Bassi-Dibai

  5. Postgraduate Program Inter-units of Bioengineering, University of São Paulo, São Carlos, SP, Brazil

    Renan Shida Marinho & Audrey Borghi-Silva

  6. Department of Physical Therapy, College of Applied Health Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA

    Shane A. Phillips & Ross Arena

  7. Healthy Living for Pandemic Event Protection (HL-PIVOT) Network, Chicago, IL, USA

    Shane A. Phillips & Ross Arena

  8. HealthPartners Institute, Minneapolis, MN, USA

    Ross Arena

Authors
  1. Aldair Darlan Santos-de-Araújo
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daniela Bassi-Dibai
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Renan Shida Marinho
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Shane A. Phillips
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ross Arena
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Audrey Borghi-Silva
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization: ADS, DB, RSM, AB; Data curation: ADS, DB, RSM, AB; Formal Analysis: ADS, DB, RSM, SAP, RA, AB; Validation: ADS, DB, SAP, RSM, AB; Visualization: ADS, DB, RSM, AB; Writing – original draft: ADS, DB; Writing – review & editing: ADS, DB, RSM, SAP, RA, AB.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Audrey Borghi-Silva.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Informed consent was obtained from all the participants. All respondents participated in this study freely and with consent. This study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Federal University of São Carlos (report number: 5.499.064) and conducted according to Declaration of Helsinki.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Santos-de-Araújo, A.D., Bassi-Dibai, D., Marinho, R.S. et al. Comparing hemodynamic and cardiorespiratory responses during six-minute walk and step tests in mild acute COVID-19. Sci Rep (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-41337-1

Download citation

  • Received: 23 April 2025

  • Accepted: 19 February 2026

  • Published: 23 February 2026

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-41337-1

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Keywords

  • Functional capacity
  • Six-minute step test
  • Six-minute walking test
  • COVID-19
Download PDF

Advertisement

Explore content

  • Research articles
  • News & Comment
  • Collections
  • Subjects
  • Follow us on Facebook
  • Follow us on X
  • Sign up for alerts
  • RSS feed

About the journal

  • About Scientific Reports
  • Contact
  • Journal policies
  • Guide to referees
  • Calls for Papers
  • Editor's Choice
  • Journal highlights
  • Open Access Fees and Funding

Publish with us

  • For authors
  • Language editing services
  • Open access funding
  • Submit manuscript

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

  • Explore articles by subject
  • Find a job
  • Guide to authors
  • Editorial policies

Scientific Reports (Sci Rep)

ISSN 2045-2322 (online)

nature.com sitemap

About Nature Portfolio

  • About us
  • Press releases
  • Press office
  • Contact us

Discover content

  • Journals A-Z
  • Articles by subject
  • protocols.io
  • Nature Index

Publishing policies

  • Nature portfolio policies
  • Open access

Author & Researcher services

  • Reprints & permissions
  • Research data
  • Language editing
  • Scientific editing
  • Nature Masterclasses
  • Research Solutions

Libraries & institutions

  • Librarian service & tools
  • Librarian portal
  • Open research
  • Recommend to library

Advertising & partnerships

  • Advertising
  • Partnerships & Services
  • Media kits
  • Branded content

Professional development

  • Nature Awards
  • Nature Careers
  • Nature Conferences

Regional websites

  • Nature Africa
  • Nature China
  • Nature India
  • Nature Japan
  • Nature Middle East
  • Privacy Policy
  • Use of cookies
  • Legal notice
  • Accessibility statement
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Your US state privacy rights
Springer Nature

© 2026 Springer Nature Limited

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing