Atormac
Neurology India
menu-bar5 Open access journal indexed with Index Medicus
  Users online: 998  
 Home | Login 
About Editorial board Articlesmenu-bullet NSI Publicationsmenu-bullet Search Instructions Online Submission Subscribe Videos Etcetera Contact
  Navigate Here 
 Search
 
  
 Resource Links
  »  Similar in PUBMED
 »  Search Pubmed for
 »  Search in Google Scholar for
 »Related articles
  »  Article in PDF (660 KB)
  »  Citation Manager
  »  Access Statistics
  »  Reader Comments
  »  Email Alert *
  »  Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this Article
 »  Abstract
 » Methods
 » Results
 » Discussion
 » Conclusion
 »  References
 »  Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed118    
    Printed4    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded12    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal

 


 
Table of Contents    
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 67  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 1033-1040

Post-stroke Visual Gait Measure for Developing Countries: A Reliability and Validity Study


1 Department of Occupational Therapy, Pandit Deendayal Upadhyaya National Institute for Persons with Physical Disabilities, New Delhi, India
2 Department of Statistics, University of Lucknow, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India

Date of Web Publication10-Sep-2019

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Kamal Narayan Arya
Pandit Deendayal Upadhyaya National Institute for Persons with Physical Disabilities, 4 VD Marg, New Delhi - 110 002
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0028-3886.266273

Rights and Permissions

 » Abstract 


Background: Visual gait assessment is a cost-effective clinical method to assess post-stroke gait deviations. The Rivermead Visual Gait Assessment (RVGA) is a one such measure that assesses the kinematic aspect of the gait deviations in stroke. However, the available information on psycho-clinocometric properties of the measure is not adequate.
Objective: To establish reliability and validity of RVGA using walking-videos of the post-stroke subjects.
Methods: Design: Observational study.
Setting: A rehabilitation institute Participants: A convenience sample of 40 chronic stroke patients.
Outcome Measures: RVGA, Fugl–Meyer assessment (lower extremity), 10-m walk test, Time up and go test, and Berg balance scale (BBS).
Procedure: Walking was video-taped from the anterior aspect, posterior aspect, affected side, and less-affected side. After coding the tapes, a research staff member provided them to four different raters in a random order. Each rater scored the coded video on the RVGA data collection sheet twice: one at the baseline and another after 1 month to eliminate any recollection of the initial assessment.
Results: The findings exhibit that there was good-to-excellent agreement between the scores of the raters and also between the assessments (correlation coefficient = 0.94 to 0.95; P < 0.001). The measure also exhibits acceptable validity when correlated with scores of BBS (r = 0.4; P < 0.001).
Conclusion: Video-based RVGA is a reliable and valid tool to assess gait-related impairment in post-stroke hemiparesis. This cost-effective measure may be incorporated in the clinical and research practice to discern and quantify complex phenomenon of the gait deviation. RVGA may be considered as a useful tool, especially in developing countries where expensive gait analyzer is usually not available.


Keywords: Gait assessment, rehabilitation, reliability, stroke, validity
Key Message: Assessment of post.stroke gait deviations is a complex phenomenon. RVGA is a simple and economical clinical tool exhibiting good psychometric properties.


How to cite this article:
Arya KN, Pandian S, Kumar V, Agarwal G G, Asthana A. Post-stroke Visual Gait Measure for Developing Countries: A Reliability and Validity Study. Neurol India 2019;67:1033-40

How to cite this URL:
Arya KN, Pandian S, Kumar V, Agarwal G G, Asthana A. Post-stroke Visual Gait Measure for Developing Countries: A Reliability and Validity Study. Neurol India [serial online] 2019 [cited 2019 Sep 23];67:1033-40. Available from: http://www.neurologyindia.com/text.asp?2019/67/4/1033/266273




Gait deviation is a common manifestation of post-stroke hemiparesis. The deviation occurs because of the asymmetry caused by the half-side body paresis.[1] In addition to the paresis, abnormal muscle activation, synergy, increased tone, imbalance between agonist and antagonist muscles, and contracture also contribute to the hemiparetic gait.[2] Foot drop, knee hyperextension, and pelvis hiking are some of the commonly observed disturbances in stroke patients.[2],[3],[4] As and when patients start walking, they usually adopt a stereotypical abnormal gait pattern. Most spatiotemporal variables such as stance time and step length on the affected leg and walking speed are altered. The pathomechanics leads to inefficient, unsafe, or nonfunctional walking.[1] Furthermore, post-stroke patients have low or no perception for the actual gait asymmetries.[5] Most subjects do not achieve functional and community ambulation.[6] The disability further affects the quality of life.[7] Post-stroke gait rehabilitation primarily depends upon determining the specific deviations. Thus, an objective investigation is essential to plan a successful intervention program.

Various methods are available in clinical and research practice to identify and quantify the impairment.[8] A complex phenomenon such as gait, being a complex dynamic phenomenon, can be analyzed by sophisticated kinematic and kinetic analysis. However, gait analysis are too expensive to use in the regular practice, especially in developing countries.

Visual gait observation, a clinical and cost-effective technique, is very useful in discerning deviations during walking among post-stroke hemiparetic subjects.[9],[10],[11] Although clinical observation of the gross deviations can be performed by the naked eye, the detection and quantification of all the possible impairments require a structured approach. There are few observation-based tools available to assess gait related impairments for neurological disorders including stroke. The Rivermead Visual Gait Assessment (RVGA), the Gait Assessment and Intervention Tool, the adapted New York Medical School Orthotic Gait Analysis work sheet, the Hemiplegic Gait Analysis Form, and the Wisconsin Gait Scale are some of the identified measures for observational gait evaluation in stroke. RVGA assesses kinematic aspect of the gait deviations and is considered to be the clinically useful measure. The scale has items for the upper limb, trunk, pelvis, hip, knee, and ankle to discern typical alterations exhibited by a hemiparetic subject during walking. The head-to-toe order of items allows an assessor to be at ease during visualizing the impairment. The items are separately categorized for stance and swing phases of the gait. The RVGA also has a provision to evaluate opposite aspects of deviation; for instance, knee excessive flexion or extension as well as ankle in excess plantar flexion or dorsi flexion.[10] The extremes allow the measurement possible deviations that might be adapted by the different stroke patients. The vision of examiner is the medium to recognize and compute the gait-deviations. Thus, underlying knowledge and expertise in gait-biomechanics play a decisive role for a skillful rater.

The developer of RVGA has already established its initial reliability and validity.[10] No further studies have been conducted to confirm and expand the findings. The available information on psycho-clinocometric properties of the measure is not adequate.[11] Further, the gait assessment by RVGA may be enhanced using videos. However, the reliability and validity of the same has not been established yet. The objective of the study was to establish the reliability and validity of the video-based RVGA in post-stroke subjects.


 » Methods Top


Participants

Subjects were recruited from a lower extremity trial conducted in a rehabilitation institute. The present study was approved by the ethics committee of Pandit Deendayal Upadhyaya National Institute for Persons with Physical Disabilities, New Delhi, India. The participants were enrolled in the study if they met the following inclusion criteria: (i) unilateral stroke of >6 months, (ii) hemiparesis of either right or left side, (iii) age between 30 to 60 years, (iv) normal ambulation prior to stroke, and (v) able to walk for at least 10 m without any physical assistance, foot orthosis, and walking-device. The subjects were excluded if they exhibited the following features: (i) any neurological or orthopedic disorder affecting locomotion and balance, (ii) severe cognitive and perceptual deficit, and (iii) cardiovascular instability.

Design

The present study was a prospective observational design.

Instruments

The Rivermead visual gait assessment

The RVGA, a visual-based gait measure used to discern gait deviations in neurologically disorders, especially stroke. It consists of 20 items (2 arms, 11 stance phase, and 7 swing phase) which assess the deviations on the affected side. Each item is scored on 4-point scale ranging from 0 to 3 (0 = normal, 1 = mild deviation, 2 = moderate deviation, and 3 = severe deviation). Only item 2 is scored up to moderate alteration; thus, the total score varies from 0 (normal gait) to 59 (severely affected gait). Visual observations are made on the impaired lower limb while the patient walks at a normal place with orthotic devices as applicable.[10] However, in the present study, participants having ability to walk without any such appliances for at least 10 m were recruited. This allowed for the true presentation of gait deviation as well and increased visibility of the ankle-foot for observation were clearly visible for the observation.

In the preliminary study, the developer of the RVGA determined it to be it a reliable and valid tool for the assessment of gait deviation in a history of a neurological problems, such as stroke or multiple sclerosis patients.[10]

Validity related measures

Fugl–Meyer assessment (lower extremity)

The Fugl–Meyer assessment (FMA) is the most commonly used motor measure to quantify recovery of post-stroke hemiparetic patients.[12] The FMA comprises subsection exclusively for the lower extremity (FMA-LE). In general, FMA-LE has six items not varying from reflex activity, pure and combined synergistic movements, and voluntary performance. The item further consists of 17 sub-items in total. The motor performance is scored on a three-point ordinal scale (0, no performance to 2, faultless performance) with a maximum score of 34 indicating good motor recovery and minimum score of 0 signifying poor recovery.

The FMA has been found to be a reliable (0.95 to 0.99) and valid (0.71 to 0.76) tool.[13],[14] Specifically, FMA-LE exhibited adequate reliability and validity to assess motor recovery of the lower limb post-stroke.[15]

Gait speed

The 10-meter walk test (10MWT) was used to estimate the gait speed, through analysis of the time taken to cover the 10 M distance.[16],[17] The participants were to walk at their comfortable and maximal speed for a distance of 10 m. The time was not considered for the first and the last 1 m to allow for acceleration and deceleration, respectively. The mean time of three readings was calculated for the performance time. The gait speeds [comfortable (Speed C) and maximal (Speed M)] in meter/second (m/s) were estimated using the relation = 8/the mean time of performance. The 10MWT exhibited considerable reliability (0.95 to 0.99) and validity (0.60 to 0.94) in patients with stroke.[18],[19],[20]

Time up and go test

The Time up and go test (TUG) is a time measure of sit-to-stand and 3-m walk, to and fro. The test is demonstrated to have excellent reliability (0.95) and considerable validity (0.62 to 0.96) in stroke patients.[21],[22]

Berg Balance Scale

The Berg Balance Scale (BBS) assesses balance and fall risks among stroke subjects. Although the scale was developed for elderly, it is commonly used and found to be reliable and valid in post-stroke patients.[23] This 14-item performance-based measure is scored on a five-point ordinal scale range from 0 (poor balance) to 4 (good balance).[24] BBS showed good to excellent reliability (0.72 to 0.95) and validity (0.82 to 0.94).[25],[26],[27]

Assessment protocol

Reliability

Prior to the trial intervention, all the participants were made to walk at comfortable speed on a 15-m obstacle-free pathway. A reference line was drawn on the floor to provide a guiding direction during walking. The lower dress of the subjects was folded up to above knee to have a clear view of the lower leg and joints. A bicolor VELCRO strap was also tied around the waist (along the line joining both anterior and posterior superior iliac spines) to view the deviation related to pelvis level. The participants were not allowed to wear any foot wear during the test. The walking was video-taped from anterior aspect, posterior aspect, affected side, and less-affected side. Four separate rounds of the walking were conducted to take the videos from each view. The videotaping was conducted by staff not part of the study at the research site at the research-site. After coding the tapes, the staff provided them to the four different raters in random order. Two raters had more than 20 years of experience in neurorehabilitation, and the others were novice in the field. A common discussion on each item of RVGA was held to clarify the observation and scoring as per the guidelines of the scale developers. Prior to the study, three trial videos were scored by the raters to acquaint with the method of assessment.

Each rater scored the coded video on the RVGA data collection sheets twice, one at the baseline and other after one month to eliminate any recollection of the initial assessment. The assessors were not informed about the paretic side of the subjects to reduce any bias of negligible to mild deviations. During each scoring session, the rater played the coded video clip of a subject using VLC Media Player version 2.2.1. The playing speed of clip was slowed to half. The reduced speed of video allowed the assessor to perceive the deviations more accurately for each body part during every phase of the gait cycle. Only one clip was scored by each rater in a day to avoid any possible error because of stereotypical observations. Further, each rater scored the measure separately on an individual computer system.

Validity

10MWT, TUG, and BBS were conducted in a separate session as per the standard guidelines of each measure.

Intervention

The assessments were considered from an ongoing trial in which as conventional management, the affected lower extremity received motor therapy according to neurophysiological approaches such as Brunnstorm and Bobath.[28],[29] The intervention comprised of reflexive, synergistic, out-of-synergy, active, weight bearing, and anti-deformity movements. The experimental protocol consisted of task-based mirror therapy. Object based movements such as ball rolling, rocking-on-board, wiping, pedaling, shifting were performed by the less-affected side in sitting/long sitting position in front of a mirror frame while hiding the affected limb. The movement of the less-affected lower limb was reflected and perceived as the affected extremity.

Data analysis

Reliability and validity analysis of the data in addition definition of the descriptive and inferential statistics was conducted using IBM SPSS, Version 22.0. The reliability for the global RVGA score and validity was analyzed using the Pearson correlation coefficient (r). First assessments of all the raters were considered for validity estimation. A P value ≤0.05 was considered as significant. The coefficients 0.50 to 0.69, 0.70 to 0.89, and >0.09 were considered as moderately, highly, and very highly correlated, respectively.[30] Furthermore, level of agreement between and within raters for individual RVGA item was calculated by the Kappa measure of agreement (κ). The κ value of <0.2, 0.21 to 0.4, 0.41 to 0.6, 0.61 to 0.8, and > 0.8 were considered as poor, fair, moderate, substantial, and perfect agreement, respectively.[31]


 » Results Top


All enrolled subjects signed the informed consent form and completed the assessment protocol. Out of 40 subjects, there were 34 males and 6 female, the average age of the participants was 52 years. The mean post-stroke duration was 19 months, with 30 subjects having ischemic stroke and 22 patients exhibiting right side paresis. The detail demographic characteristics of the participants are given in [Table 1].
Table 1: Demographic and clinical characteristics of the study participants

Click here to view


Inter-rater reliability

The analysis for total RVGA scores between the experienced raters exhibited a very high correlation (r = 0.940 P < 0.001). Similar strength of relation was also found for the novice raters (r = 0.941, P < 0.001). The individual item analysis demonstrated κ value ranging from 0.213 (P = 0.013) to 0.903 (P < 0.001) for the experienced raters. The individual item analysis for the novice therapist varied from 0.278 (P = 0.006) to 0.774 (P < 0.001). However, three and four items of RVGA showed no agreement for the experienced and novice therapists, respectively [Table 2]a and [Table 2]c.


Click here to view


Intra-rater reliability

The correlation between the first and the second assessment was found to be very high for all the raters, r ranging from 0.951 to 0.958 (P < 0.001). The κ for individual RVGA item varied from 0.222 (P = 0.018) to 0.776 (P < 0.001) and 0.252 (P = 0.05) to 0.695 (P < 0.001) for both the experienced raters, respectively. For the novice raters, the agreement level was found to be 0.393 (P < 0.001) to 0.788 (P < 0.001) and 0.212 (P = 0.001) to 0.624 (P < 0.001) [Table 2]b and [Table 2]c. One item of RVGA each for an experienced rater and a novice rater did not show any agreement.

Concurrent validity

The total RVGA score exhibited significant positive relation with BBS for all the raters (r = 0.386 to 0.477, P = 0.014 to 0.002). However, RVGA was not found to be correlated with FMA-LE, 10MWT, or TUG (P > 0.05) [Table 3].
Table 3: Concurrent validity of Rivermead Visual Gait Assessment

Click here to view



 » Discussion Top


Gait impairment among post-stroke survivors interferes with the functional recovery and increases the disability level.[1] Management requires critical assessment of the deficits. Various tools of various merit and demerit available ranging from the observational to sophisticated analysis. Because the gait is a complex and swift phenomenon, observational scales are usually considered as less reliable as compared to the machine-based measures. Gait-analysis are costly, complex, and time-taking tools. Because of the inclusion of smart phones in daily life, obtaining video of walking is quite easy and economical for clinicians. RVGA is an old gait measure for neurologically impaired subjects, especially stroke, developed at a time when videography was more difficult to capture effortless. Although the items of RVGA are most appropriate for post-stroke gait evaluation, the chances of missing a deviation are common during the eye-observation method. Thus, the present study was conducted to validate the assessment process of RVGA using gait videos.

The findings suggest that the RVGA is a reliable and valid way of assessing gait in patients with stroke. These results confirmed the preliminary psychometric reports conducted on a small sample by the developers of the scale.[10] The present study is the first investigation to utilize the items of RVGA for quantifying deviations by videography. The scale is useful in evaluating array of gait-deviations exhibited by post-stroke hemiparetic subjects. The slow-motion assessment of video-tape from four different views (anterior, posterior, affected side, and less-affected side) allowed raters to decisively discern the deviations without causing discomfort to the patient.

Observational gait measures are commonly used in clinical practice.[32] In addition to RVGA, other measures are also recommended. Video-based assessment using scales such as Wisconsin Gait Scale and the Gait Abnormality Rating Scale have also been conducted. Both the measures were found to be reliable and valid using video-protocol.[33],[34] In addition, there are a range of gait related measures used in post-stroke studies; however, most of them are nonvideo-based.[16],[17],[35] The tools are described in [Table 4]. All they should be considered based on their advanatges and disadvangates and then used. The video-based validation of RVGA was a need. The present study authenticates the use of RVGA adjunct by videos in stroke-gait assessment.
Table 4: Gait related measures used in stroke

Click here to view


The inter-rater reliability of RVGA was found to be good by its developer.[10] However, the reliability was observed up to very high in the present study. This may be because of the use of gait videos. This validates the use of videos in the observational gait assessment. The experience of rater was not found to be an important factor for using RVGA. Few swing-phase items did not show any agreement between the raters, two (trunk flexion and pelvis backward rotation) of them are common between the experience and novice raters. This could be because of the dynamic and complex aspect of the swing phase which was difficult to be discerned by the raters. Both the group of therapists demonstrated almost same level of intra-rater reliability. All the raters exhibited acceptable agreement for almost all the items. The majority of the items had fair to substantial agreement followed by negligible perfect and poor agreement.

The relation between RVGA and BBS is in concordance with that of the developer studies. However, no association of RVGA was observed with FMA-LE, 10MWT, or TUG. This could be attributed to the constructs of the measures. The FMA-LE assesses the motor recovery components in the static positions such as lying, sitting, and standing. Further, it does not consider the trunk status and less-affected limb. In contrast, the RVGA examines the deviations involving the trunk, pelvis, lower limbs, and upper limbs in various dynamic aspects. In addition, the post-stroke gait deviation is a maladaptive learned behavior that may not be influenced by the recovery of individual FMA-LE item. The construct of 10MWT and TUG is not stroke-specific. Post-stroke subjects maintain the speed of walking for functional achievements despite the deviations. Furthermore, TUG has exhibited no relation with the kinetic and kinematic variables in stroke.[47]

In view of the cost and time factor for gait analyses, video-based RVGA may have a wider application in developing countries. In the present study, the videos were captured using a smart-phone. Structured procedures to record the clips need to be developed in the future. The RVGA exhibited no relation with the speed measures of gait. This indicates that the post-stroke subject could maintain functional walking in spite of the gait deviations. Although recognition of deviations was undemanding, the raters occasionally experienced difficulty in separating the mild and moderate deviations. The RVGA can only be applied to independent ambulatory post-stroke subjects. Future studies are recommended to establish the validity of RVGA using gait analyzer. The other type of validity is also needed to be determined. Further, there is a need to develop a standard training manual for the RVGA using videos to have uniformity.


 » Conclusion Top


The RVGA is a reliable and valid tool to assess the gait-related impairment in post-stroke hemiparetic patients. It is a simple and economical method to assess the stroke-gait, a complex phenomenon in clinical and research purpose.

Financial support and sponsorship

Pandit Deendayal Upadhyaya National Institute for Persons with Physical Disabilities, New Delhi, India.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
 » References Top

1.
Verma R, Arya KN, Sharma P, Garg RK. Understanding gait control in post-stroke: Implications for management. J Bodyw Mov Ther 2012;16:14-21.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Arene N, Hidler J. Understanding motor impairment in the paretic lower limb after a stroke: A review of the literature. Top Stroke Rehabil 2009;16:346-56.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Cooper A, Alghamdi GA, Alghamdi MA, Altowaijri A, Richardson S. The relationship of lower limb muscle strength and knee joint hyperextension during the stance phase of gait in hemiparetic stroke patients. Physiother Res Int 2012;17:150-6.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Milot MH, Nadeau S, Gravel D, Requião LF. Bilateral level of effort of the plantar flexors, hip flexors, and extensors during gait in hemiparetic and healthy individuals. Stroke 2006;37:2070-5.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Wutzke CJ, Faldowski RA, Lewek MD. Individuals poststroke do not perceive their spatiotemporal gait asymmetries as abnormal. Phys Ther 2015;95:1244-53.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Perry J, Garrett M, Gronley JK, Mulroy SJ. Classification of walking handicap in the stroke population. Stroke 1995;26:982-9.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Algurén B, Fridlund B, Cieza A, Sunnerhagen KS, Christensson L. Factors associated with health-related quality of life after stroke: A 1-year prospective cohort study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2012;26:266-74.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Balaban B, Tok F. Gait disturbances in patients with stroke. PM R 2014;6:635-42.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Brunnekreef JJ, van Uden CJ, van Moorsel S, Kooloos JG. Reliability of videotaped observational gait analysis in patients with orthopedic impairments. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2005;6:17.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Lord SE, Halligan PW, Wade DT. Visual gait analysis: The development of a clinical assessment and scale. Clin Rehabil 1998;12:107-19.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Ferrarello F, Bianchi VA, Baccini M, Rubbieri G, Mossello E, Cavallini MC, et al. Tools for observational gait analysis in patients with stroke: A systematic review. Phys Ther 2013;93:1673-85.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Pandian S, Arya KN. Stroke-related motor outcome measures: Do they quantify the neurophysiological aspects of upper extremity recovery? J Bodyw Mov Ther 2014;18:412-23.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Gladstone DJ, Danells CJ, Black SE. The fugl-meyer assessment of motor recovery after stroke: A critical review of its measurement properties. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2002;16:232-40.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Hsieh YW, Wu CY, Lin KC, Chang YF, Chen CL, Liu JS, et al. Responsiveness and validity of three outcome measures of motor function after stroke rehabilitation. Stroke 2009;40:1386-91.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Park EY, Choi YI. Psychometric properties of the lower extremity subscale of the fugl-myer assessment for community-dwelling hemiplegic stroke patients. J Phys Ther Sci 2014;26:1775-7.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Srivastava A, Taly AB, Gupta A, Murali T. Rehabilitation interventions to improve locomotor outcome in chronic stroke survivors: A prospective, repeated-measure study. Neurol India 2015;63:347-52.  Back to cited text no. 16
[PUBMED]  [Full text]  
17.
Sankaranarayan H, Gupta A, Khanna M, Taly AB, Thennarasu K. Role of ankle foot orthosis in improving locomotion and functional recovery in patients with stroke: A prospective rehabilitation study. J Neurosci Rural Pract 2016;7:544-9.  Back to cited text no. 17
[PUBMED]  [Full text]  
18.
Fulk GD, Echternach JL. Test-retest reliability and minimal detectable change of gait speed in individuals undergoing rehabilitation after stroke. J Neurol Phys Ther 2008;32:8-13.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
van Hedel HJ, Wirz M, Dietz V. Assessing walking ability in subjects with spinal cord injury: Validity and reliability of 3 walking tests. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005;86:190-6.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
Finch E, Brooks D, Stratford PW, Mayo EN, Part II Outcome Measure Reviews. Physical Rehabilitation Outcome Measures: A Guide to Enhanced Clinical Decision Making. Ontario: Canadian Physiotherapy Association; 2002.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Ng SS, Hui-Chan CW. The timed up & go test: Its reliability and association with lower-limb impairments and locomotor capacities in people with chronic stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005;86:1641-7.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
Hafsteinsdóttir TB, Rensink M, Schuurmans M. Clinimetric properties of the timed up and go test for patients with stroke: A systematic review. Top Stroke Rehabil 2014;21:197-210.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.
Blum L, Korner-Bitensky N. Usefulness of the berg balance scale in stroke rehabilitation: A systematic review. Phys Ther 2008;88:559-66.  Back to cited text no. 23
    
24.
Straube D, Moore J, Leech K, Hornby TG. Item analysis of the berg balance scale in individuals with subacute and chronic stroke. Top Stroke Rehabil 2013;20:241-9.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.
Flansbjer UB, Blom J, Brogårdh C. The reproducibility of berg balance scale and the single-leg stance in chronic stroke and the relationship between the two tests. PM R 2012;4:165-70.  Back to cited text no. 25
    
26.
Hiengkaew V, Jitaree K, Chaiyawat P. Minimal detectable changes of the berg balance scale, fugl-meyer assessment scale, timed “Up & go” test, gait speeds, and 2-minute walk test in individuals with chronic stroke with different degrees of ankle plantarflexor tone. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2012;93:1201-8.  Back to cited text no. 26
    
27.
Mao HF, Hsueh IP, Tang PF, Sheu CF, Hsieh CL. Analysis and comparison of the psychometric properties of three balance measures for stroke patients. Stroke 2002;33:1022-7.  Back to cited text no. 27
    
28.
Naghdi S, Ansari NN, Mansouri K, Hasson S. A neurophysiological and clinical study of brunnstrom recovery stages in the upper limb following stroke. Brain Inj 2010;24:1372-8.  Back to cited text no. 28
    
29.
Mikołajewska E. The value of the NDT-bobath method in post-stroke gait training. Adv Clin Exp Med 2013;22:261-72.  Back to cited text no. 29
    
30.
Carter R, Lubinsky J, Domholdt E, Statistical Analysis of Relationships: The Basics. Rehabilitation Research: Principles and Applications. 4th ed. Missouri (USA): Elsevier Saunders; 2011.  Back to cited text no. 30
    
31.
Viera AJ, Garrett JM. Understanding interobserver agreement: The kappa statistic. Fam Med. 2005 May;37(5):360-3.  Back to cited text no. 31
    
32.
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.  Back to cited text no. 32
    
33.
Lu X, Hu N, Deng S, Li J, Qi S, Bi S, et al. The reliability, validity and correlation of two observational gait scales assessed by video tape for chinese subjects with hemiplegia. J Phys Ther Sci 2015;27:3717-21.  Back to cited text no. 33
    
34.
Yaliman A, Kesiktas N, Ozkaya M, Eskiyurt N, Erkan O, Yilmaz E, et al. Evaluation of intrarater and interrater reliability of the wisconsin gait scale with using the video taped stroke patients in a turkish sample. NeuroRehabilitation 2014;34:253-8.  Back to cited text no. 34
    
35.
Patel BM, Vaghela N, Ganjiwale D. Walking ability in stroke patients using knee gaiter and suspended walker for gait training. J Family Med Prim Care 2017;6:795-7.  Back to cited text no. 35
[PUBMED]  [Full text]  
36.
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.  Back to cited text no. 36
    
37.
Kollen B, Kwakkel G, Lindeman E. Time dependency of walking classification in stroke. Phys Ther 2006;86:618-25.  Back to cited text no. 37
    
38.
Jonsdottir J, Cattaneo D. Reliability and validity of the dynamic gait index in persons with chronic stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2007;88:1410-5.  Back to cited text no. 38
    
39.
Herman T, Inbar-Borovsky N, Brozgol M, Giladi N, Hausdorff JM. The dynamic gait index in healthy older adults: The role of stair climbing, fear of falling and gender. Gait Posture 2009;29:237-41.  Back to cited text no. 39
    
40.
Fulk GD, Echternach JL, Nof L, O'Sullivan S. Clinometric properties of the six-minute walk test in individuals undergoing rehabilitation poststroke. Physiother Theory Pract 2008;24:195-204.  Back to cited text no. 40
    
41.
Kubo H, Nozoe M, Yamamoto M, Kamo A, Noguchi M, Kanai M, et al. Safety and feasibility of the 6-minute walk test in patients with acute stroke. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 2018;27:1632-8.  Back to cited text no. 41
    
42.
Pizzi A, Carlucci G, Falsini C, Lunghi F, Verdesca S, Grippo A, et al. Gait in hemiplegia: Evaluation of clinical features with the wisconsin gait scale. J Rehabil Med 2007;39:170-4.  Back to cited text no. 42
    
43.
Wellmon R, Degano A, Rubertone JA, Campbell S, Russo KA. Interrater and intrarater reliability and minimal detectable change of the wisconsin gait scale when used to examine videotaped gait in individuals post-stroke. Arch Physiother 2015;5:11.  Back to cited text no. 43
    
44.
Zimbelman J, Daly JJ, Roenigk KL, Butler K, Burdsall R, Holcomb JP, et al. Capability of 2 gait measures for detecting response to gait training in stroke survivors: Gait assessment and intervention tool and the tinetti gait scale. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2012;93:129-36.  Back to cited text no. 44
    
45.
Daly JJ, Nethery J, McCabe JP, Brenner I, Rogers J, Gansen J, et al. Development and testing of the gait assessment and intervention tool (G.A.I.T.): A measure of coordinated gait components. J Neurosci Methods 2009;178:334-9.  Back to cited text no. 45
    
46.
Hughes KA, Bell F. Visual assessment of hemiplegic gait following stroke: Pilot study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1994;75:1100-7.  Back to cited text no. 46
    
47.
Bonnyaud C, Pradon D, Zory R, Bensmail D, Vuillerme N, Roche N, et al. Gait parameters predicted by timed up and go performance in stroke patients. NeuroRehabilitation 2015;36:73-80.  Back to cited text no. 47
    



 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3], [Table 4]



 

Top
Print this article  Email this article
   
Online since 20th March '04
Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow