Physical Therapy Rehabilitation Science

korean Academy of Physical Therapy Rehabilitation Science (물리치료재활과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Perception and use of gait measures among physical therapists in South Korea

  • Jang, Ho Young (Department of Physical Therapy, St. Paul's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea) ;
  • Kim, You Lim (Department of Physical Therapy, College of Health Science and Social Welfare, Sahmyook University) ;
  • Kim, Sung-jin (Department of Physical Therapy, College of Health Science and Social Welfare, Sahmyook University) ;
  • Yoon, Tak Yong (Department of Physical Therapy, College of Health Science and Social Welfare, Sahmyook University) ;
  • Kim, Kyung Hun (Department of Physical Therapy, Gimcheon University) ;
  • Ahn, Ick Keun (Department of Physical Therapy, College of Health Science and Social Welfare, Sahmyook University) ;
  • Lee, Suk Min (Department of Physical Therapy, College of Health Science and Social Welfare, Sahmyook University)
  • Received : 2017.04.27
  • Accepted : 2017.06.07
  • Published : 2017.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate the physical therapists' perception of the use of gait measures, the frequency of the gait measures used, and also to identify the barriers that limit the use of these assessment tools. Design: Cross-sectional study. Methods: Physical therapists from the Seoul, Gyeonggi area from March to July 2016 were included in the study. Over the course of 18 weeks, a cross-sectional study was conducted with a self-report questionnaire. A total of 700 questionnaires were distributed and 350 questionnaires (50%) were collected, however with the exclusion of 140 questionnaires due to non-consent, a total of 210 questionnaires (30%) were analysed. Results: Out of the 10 standardized assessment tools, the therapists showed the highest perception for the timed up and go test (TUG [n=153, 72.9%]) and they also had high perception for the 10 meters walk test (10MWT [n=149, 71.0%]), and 6-minute walk test (6MWT [n=123, 58.6%]). The respondents answered that the TUG (n=116, 55.2%), 10MWT (n=100, 47.6%), and 6MWT (n=51, 24.3%) was used the most often. On the contrary, only four (1.9%) therapists have used the Chedoke-McMaster stroke assessment and the Rivermead Mobility Index. The lack of time was considered as the most important barrier to the use of assessment tools in clinical practice. Conclusions: Through this study, it has been shown that the domestic physical therapists used the TUG and the 10MWT mainly due to high recognition and evaluation status; however, the lack of time was the greatest impediment to the clinical application of the gait assessment tools.

Keywords

References

  1. Perry J. Gait analysis: normal and pathological function. Thorofare, NJ: Slack; 1992.
  2. Mayo NE, Wood-Dauphinee S, Cote R, Durcan L, Carlton J. Activity, participation, and quality of life 6 months poststroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002;83:1035-42. https://doi.org/10.1053/apmr.2002.33984
  3. Langhorne P, Coupar F, Pollock A. Motor recovery after stroke: a systematic review. Lancet Neurol 2009;8:741-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(09)70150-4
  4. Sidaway B, Anderson J, Danielson G, Martin L, Smith G. Effects of long-term gait training using visual cues in an individual with Parkinson disease. Phys Ther 2006;86:186-94.
  5. Behrman AL, Lawless-Dixon AR, Davis SB, Bowden MG, Nair P, Phadke C, et al. Locomotor training progression and outcomes after incomplete spinal cord injury. Phys Ther 2005;85:1356-71.
  6. Hornby TG, Zemon DH, Campbell D. Robotic-assisted, bodyweight-supported treadmill training in individuals following motor incomplete spinal cord injury. Phys Ther 2005;85:52-66.
  7. Best R, Begg R. Overview of movement analysis and gait features. In: Begg R, Palaniswami M, editors. Computational intelligence for movement science: neural networks and support vector machines, and other emerging technologies. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Inc.; 2006. p. 1-69.
  8. Pattison KM, Brooks D, Cameron JI, Salbach NM. Factors influencing physical therapists' use of standardized measures of walking capacity poststroke across the care continuum. Phys Ther 2015;95:1507-17. https://doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20140267
  9. American Physical Therapy Association. Guide to physical therapist practice. 2nd ed. Alexandria, VA: American Physical Therapy Association; 2001. p. 9-746.
  10. Tyson S, DeSouza L. A systematic review of methods to measure balance and walking post-stroke. Part 1: ordinal scales. Phys Ther Rev 2002;7:173-86. https://doi.org/10.1179/108331902235001589
  11. Tyson S, DeSouza L. The measurement of balance and walking post-stroke. Part 2: functional performance tests. Phys Ther Rev 2002;7:187-91. https://doi.org/10.1179/108331902235001615
  12. Kim BO. Methods in clinical gait analysis. J Korean Acad Rehabil Med 1994;18:191-202.
  13. Berg KO, Maki BE, Williams JI, Holliday PJ, Wood-Dauphinee SL. Clinical and laboratory measures of postural balance in an elderly population. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1992;73:1073-80.
  14. Kang TW, Oh DW. Literature review of walking performance tests for people with post-stroke hemiparesis. Korean J Neural Rehabil 2013;3:28-43.
  15. Van Peppen RP, Maissan FJ, Van Genderen FR, Van Dolder R, Van Meeteren NL. Outcome measures in physiotherapy management of patients with stroke: a survey into self-reported use, and barriers to and facilitators for use. Physiother Res Int 2008;13: 255-70. https://doi.org/10.1002/pri.417
  16. Salbach NM, Guilcher SJ, Jaglal SB. Physical therapists' perceptions and use of standardized assessments of walking ability post-stroke. J Rehabil Med 2011;43:543-9. https://doi.org/10.2340/16501977-0820
  17. Sibley KM, Salbach NM. Applying knowledge translation theory to physical therapy research and practice in balance and gait assessment: case report. Phys Ther 2015;95:579-87. https://doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20130486
  18. Grimmer K, Bialocerkowski A, Kumar S, Milanese S. Implementing evidence in clinical practice: the 'therapies' dilemma. Physiotherapy 2004;90:189-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physio.2004.06.007
  19. Finch E, Brooks D, Stratford PW, Mayo NE; Canadian Physiotherapy Association. Physical rehabilitation outcome measures: a guide to enhanced clinical decision making. 2nd ed. Baltimore: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins; 2002.
  20. Podsiadlo D, Richardson S. The timed "Up & Go": a test of basic functional mobility for frail elderly persons. J Am Geriatr Soc 1991;39:142-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.1991.tb01616.x
  21. Shumway-Cook A, Woollacott MH. Motor control: theory and practical applications. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 1995.
  22. Collen FM, Wade DT, Robb GF, Bradshaw CM. The rivermead mobility index: a further development of the rivermead motor assessment. Int Disabil Stud 1991;13:50-4. https://doi.org/10.3109/03790799109166684
  23. Holden MK, Gill KM, Magliozzi MR. Gait assessment for neurologically impaired patients. Standards for outcome assessment. Phys Ther 1986;66:1530-9. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/66.10.1530
  24. Blum L, Korner-Bitensky N. Usefulness of the Berg balance scale in stroke rehabilitation: a systematic review. Phys Ther 2008;88:559-66. https://doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20070205
  25. Kim K, Park ES, Cho YH, Cho JS, Yu JE, Park RJ, et al. A study on the development of standard curriculum for physical therapy in Korea. J Korean Soc Phys Ther 2006;18:23-32.
  26. Sibley KM, Straus SE, Inness EL, Salbach NM, Jaglal SB. Clinical balance assessment: perceptions of commonly-used standardized measures and current practices among physiotherapists in Ontario, Canada. Implement Sci 2013;8:33. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-8-33

Cited by

  1. An Analysis of the Reliability and Validity of a Korean Version of the Mobility and Gait Assessment Tools for Patients with Stroke vol.30, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.18857/jkpt.2018.30.1.29