Brazilian version of the Functional Gait Assessment: translation, reliability, and validity for use on stroke patients

Authors

  • Paulo Fonseca Instituto de Medicina Física e Reabilitação do Hospital das Clinicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, IMREA HC FMUSP, São Paulo, SP, Brazil. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6180-8674
  • Kelven Antonio da Silva Faculdade de Ciencias Medicas da Santa Casa de São Paulo, FCMSCSP, São Paulo, SP Brasil https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7400-5731
  • Vanessa Donato do Vale Faculdade de Ciências Médicas da Santa Casa de São Paulo, FCMSCSP, São Paulo, SP Brasil
  • Claudia Santos Oliveira Centro Universitário Anapolis - Unievangélica, Goiania, GO Brasil
  • Vera Lúcia dos Santos Alves Faculdade de Ciencias Medicas da Santa Casa de São Paulo, FCMSCSP, São Paulo, SP Brasil https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9623-8704

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.34024/rnc.2021.v29.10735

Keywords:

Stroke, Balance, Gait, Validation

Abstract

Objective. Translate and adapt the Functional Gait Assessment (FGA) to Brazilian Portuguese as a measure of balance during gait in stroke patients and determine its validity and reliability based on evidence of its measurement properties. Method. A convenience sample of 45 stroke survivors (average of seven months since diagnosis) was included (mean age: 55 years; 51% women). The instrument under consideration was translated and back-translated. The performance of the FGA was assessed by two raters to determine intrarater and interrater reliability. Concurrent and discriminant validity were investigated using the Berg Balance Scale (BBS) as well as normal and fast walking speed. Results. No difficulties with the translation were found during the application of the tests. Therefore, no structural or conceptual changes to the translated version were needed to achieve cultural equivalence. Intrarater (intraclass correlation coefficient=0.93) and interrater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient=0.90) were almost perfect for the total scores. The reliability of single items was also strong, ranging from 0.74 to 0.95. Concurrent validity with other measures of gait and balance was moderate to substantial. The FGA was correlated (p<0.001) with the BBS (0.71), normal walking speed (0.66), and fast walking speed (0.70). Conclusion. The Brazilian version of the FGA is a reliable, valid instrument for assessing functional gait performance in stroke survivors.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Mansfield A, Inness EL, Mcilroy WE. Stroke. Hand Clin Neurol 2018;159:205-28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-63916-5.00013-6

Balaban B, Tok F. Gait disturbances in patients with stroke. PMR 2014;6:635-42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pmrj.2013.12.017

Lin JH, Hsu MJ, Hsu HW, Wu HC, Hsieh CL. Psychometric comparisons of 3 functional ambulation measures for patients with stroke. Stroke 2010;41:2021-5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.110.589739

Beyaert C, Vasa R, Frykberg GE. Gait post-stroke: Pathophysiology and rehabilitation strategies. Neurophysiol Clin 2015;45:335-55.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neucli.2015.09.005

Gor-García-Fogeda MD, Cano de la Cuerda R, Carratalá Tejada M, Alguacil-Diego IM. Molina-Rueda F. Observational Gait Assessments in People With Neurological Disorders: A Systematic Review. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2016;97:131–40.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2015.07.018

Alghadir AH, Al-Eisa ES, Anwer S, Sarkar B. Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of three scales for measuring balance in patients with chronic stroke. BMC Neurol 2018;18:141.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12883-018-1146-9

Mehrholz J, Wagner K, Rutte K, Meissner D, Pohl M. Predictive validity and responsiveness of the functional ambulation category in hemiparetic patients after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2007;88:1314-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2007.06.764

Wrisley DM, Marchetti GF, Kuharsky DK, Whitney SL. Reliability, internal consistency, and validity of data obtained with the functional gait assessment. Phys Ther 2004;84:906-18.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ptj/84.10.906

Yang Y, Wang Y, Zhou Y, Chen C, Xing D. Reliability of functional gait assessment in patients with Parkinson disease: interrater and intrarater reliability and internal consistency. Med (Baltimore) 2016;95:e4545. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097 /MD.0000000000004545

Weber C, Schwieterman M, Fier K, Berni J, Swartz N, Phillips R, et al. Reliability and Validity of the Functional Gait Assessment: A Systematic Review. Phys Occupat Ther Geriatr 2016;34:88-103.

http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/02703181.2015.1128509

Carson A, Hallett M, Stone J. Assessment of patients with functional neurologic disorders. Handb Clin Neurol 2016;139:169-88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-801772-2.00015-1

Moore JL, Potter K, Blankshain K, Kaplan SL, O'Dwyer LC, Sullivan JE. A core set of outcome measures for adults with neurologic conditions undergoing rehabilitation: a clinical practice guideline. J Neurol Phys Ther 2018;42:170-212.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/NPT.0000000000000229

Baker R, Esquenazi A, Benedetti MG, Desloovere K. Gait analysis: clinical facts. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med 2016;52:560-74. https://www.minervamedica.it/en/getfreepdf/SVRQa2R4NzU2bHpoeDN3VTRlMXJlZDVzQUxISHZCaWtCZmFqd0s0MXJ3TnhnRDVNWmsvUGw1b3N0VW9uMDhGcQ%253D%253D/R33Y2016N04A0560.pdf

Forsberg A, Andreasson M, Nilsågard Y. The functional gait assessment in people with multiple sclerosis: validity and sensitivity to change. Int J MS Care 2017;19:66-72.

http://dx.doi.org/10.7224/1537-2073.2015-061

Thieme H, Ritschel C, Zange C. Reliability and validity of the Functional Gait Assessment (German version) in subacute stroke patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2009;90:1565-70.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2009.03.007

Leddy AL, Crowner BE, Earhart GM. Functional gait assessment and balance evaluation systemtest: reliability, validity, sensitivity, and specificity for identifying individuals with Parkinson disease who fall. Phys Ther 2011;91:102-13. http://dx.doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20100113

Gomes AB, Henrique M-Jr, Schoeps VA, Santos MM, Pellegrinelli A, Matos BP, et al. Popular stroke knowledge in Brazil: a multicenter survey during “World Stroke Day”. eNeurological Sci 2016;6:63-7.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ensci.2016.12.002

de Santana NM, Dos Santos Figueiredo FW, de Melo Lucena DM, Adami F, Cardoso LCP, et al. The burden of stroke in Brazil in 2016: an analysis of the Global Burden of Disease study findings. BMC Res Notes 2018;11:735. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13104-018-3842-3

Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guilemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaption of self-report measures. Spine 2000;25:3186-91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014

Sousa VD, Rojjanasrirat W. Translation, adaptation and validation of instruments or scales for use in cross-cultural health care research: a clear and user-friendly guideline. J Eval Clin Pract 2011;17:268-74.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01434.x

Nilsagard Y, Kollen L, Axelsson H, Bjerlemo B, Forsberg A. Functional Gait Assessment: reliability and validity in people with peripheral vestibular disorders. Int J Ther Rehabil 2014;21:367-73.

http://dx.doi.org/10.12968/ijtr.2014.21.8.367

Wrisley DM, Kumar NA. Functional gait assessment: concurrent, discriminative, and predictive validity in community-dwelling older adults. Phys Ther 2010;90:761-73. http://dx.doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20090069

Walker ML, Austin AG, Banke GM, Foxx SR, Gaetano L, Gardner LA, et al. Reference group data for the Functional Gait Assessment. Phys Ther 2007;87:1468-77. http://dx.doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20060344

Published

2021-04-12

Issue

Section

Artigos Originais

How to Cite

1.
Fonseca P, da Silva KA, Donato do Vale V, Santos Oliveira C, dos Santos Alves VL. Brazilian version of the Functional Gait Assessment: translation, reliability, and validity for use on stroke patients. Rev Neurocienc [Internet]. 2021 Apr. 12 [cited 2025 Dec. 14];29:1-22. Available from: https://periodicos.unifesp.br/index.php/neurociencias/article/view/10735
Received 2020-06-04
Accepted 2021-02-08
Published 2021-04-12