대한물리의학회지 (Journal of the Korean Society of Physical Medicine)

  • 제17권1호
  • /
  • Pages.11-20
  • /
  • 2022
  • /
  • 1975-311X(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2287-7215(eISSN)
대한물리의학회 (The Korean Society of Physical Medicine)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Can Observational Gait Assessment Tools be used to Assess Independent Walking in Stroke Patients?

  • Ju, Sung-Kwang (Department of Physical Therapy, College of Biomedical Science, Kaya University)
  • 투고 : 2021.11.01
  • 심사 : 2021.11.27
  • 발행 : 2022.02.28
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

PURPOSE: A gait assessment is an important component of the rehabilitation process, and observational gait assessment (OGA) is used routinely in clinical settings. This study examined the association of OGA tools with the independent walking ability in stroke patients to determine a cutoff value of the OGA tool according to independence levels of stroke patient gait. METHODS: Two hundred ten hemiparetic stroke patients participated in the study. The independence of gait was identified using the Functional Ambulation Category (FAC) classifications. The walking ability was assessed using OGA tools (Rivermead Visual Gait Assessment [RVGA], Wisconsin Gait Scale [WGS], Tinetti Gait Scale [TGS], and Functional Gait Analysis [FGA]). RESULTS: Stepwise multiple regression analysis showed that among the OGA tools, the FGA correlated with the FAC. The FGA explained approximately 77% of the variance in FAC. In distinguishing the independence levels, the cutoff values were as follows: between FAC 1 and FAC 0 was .5 points; between FAC 2 and lower levels, 5.5; between FAC 3 and lower levels, 11.5; between FAC 4 and lower levels, 14.5; and between FAC 5 and lower levels, 18.5. Items 1, 2, 3, and 10 were identified as explaining most of the variance in the FGA in the stepwise multiple regression. CONCLUSION: The present study found that the FGA is an assessment tool related to the level of gait independence after stroke. Furthermore, the FGA total score can serve as an index of the increase in independence level after stroke.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Chiou II, Burnett CN. Values of activities of daily living. A survey of stroke patients and their home therapists. Phys Ther. 1985;65:901-6. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/65.6.901
  2. von Schroeder HP, Coutts RD, Lyden PD, Billings E Jr, Nickel VL. Gait parameters following stroke: a practical assessment. J Rehabil Res Dev. 1995;32: 25-31.
  3. Wade DT, Hewer RL. Functional abilities after stroke: measurement, natural history and prognosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1987;50:177-82. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.50.2.177
  4. Perry J, Garrett M, Gronley JK, Mulroy SJ. Classification of walking handicap in the stroke population. Stroke. 1995;26:982-9. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.str.26.6.982
  5. Lord SE, McPherson K, McNaughton HK, Rochester L, Weatherall M. Community ambulation after stroke: how important and obtainable is it and what measures appear predictive? Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85: 234-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2003.05.002
  6. van de Port IG, Kwakkel G, Lindeman E. Community ambulation in patients with chronic stroke: how is it related to gait speed? J rehabil Med. 2008;40:23-7. https://doi.org/10.2340/16501977-0114
  7. Dobkin BH. Training and exercise to drive poststroke recovery. Nat Clin Pract Neurol. 2008;4:76-85. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncpneuro0709
  8. Viosca E, Martinez JL, Almagro PL, Gracia A, Gonzalez C. Proposal and validation of a new functional ambulation classification scale for clinical use. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86:1234-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2004.11.016
  9. Zimbelman J, Daly JJ, Roenigk KL, Butler K, Burdsall R, Holcomb JP. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2011.08.011
  10. Gronley JK, Perry J. Gait analysis techniques: Rancho Los Amigos Hospital gait laboratory. Phys Ther. 1984; 64:1831-8. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/64.12.1831
  11. Bethoux F, Bennett S. Evaluating walking in patients with multiple sclerosis: which assessment tools are useful in clinical practice? Int J MS Care. 2011;13:4-14. https://doi.org/10.7224/1537-2073-13.1.4
  12. Van Bloemendaal M, van de Water AT, van de Port IG. Walking tests for stroke survivors: a systematic review of their measurement properties. Disabil Rehabil. 2012;34:2207-21. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2012.680649
  13. Gor-Garcia-Fogeda MD, Cano de la Cuerda R, Carratala 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2015.07.018
  14. Coutts F. Gait analysis in the therapeutic environment. Man Ther. 1999;4:2-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1356-689X(99)80003-4
  15. Eastlack ME, Arvidson J, Snyder-Mackler L, et al. Interrater reliability of videotaped observatioinal gait-analysis assessment. Phys Ther. 1991;71:465-72. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/71.6.465
  16. 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. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/84.10.906
  17. Wrisley DM, Walker ML, Echternach JL, Strasnick B. Reliability of the dynamic gait index in people with vestibular disorders. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003:84: 1528-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-9993(03)00274-0
  18. Holden MK, Gill KM, Magliozzi MR, Nathan J, Piehl-Baker L. Clinical gait assessment in the neurologically impaired. Reliability and meaningfulness. Phys Ther. 1984;64:35-40. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/64.1.35
  19. Wade DT. Measurement in neurological rehabilitation. New York. Oxford: Oxford Medical Publications. 1992.
  20. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2007.06.764
  21. Brock KA, Goldie PA, Greenwood KM. Evaluating the effectiveness of stroke rehabilitation: choosing a discriminative measure. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002;83:92-9. https://doi.org/10.1053/apmr.2002.27348
  22. Salter K, Campbell N, Richardson M, Mehta S, Jutai J, Zettler L, et al. Outcome measures in stroke rehabilitation. The evidence-based review of stroke rehabilitation (EBRSR) reviews current practices in stroke rehabilitation. 2013. Qvailable at http://www.ebrsr.com/evidence-review/20-outcome-measures-stroke-rehabilitation. Accessed November 1, 2021.
  23. Lord SE, Halligan PW, Wade DT. Visual gait analysis: the development of a clinical assessment and scale. Clin Rehabil. 1998;12:107-19. https://doi.org/10.1191/026921598666182531
  24. Pizzi A, Carlucci G, Falsini C, Lunghi F, Verdesca S, Grippo A. Gait in hemiplegia: evaluation of clinical features with the Wisconsin Gait Scale. J Rehabil Med. 2007;39:170-4. https://doi.org/10.2340/16501977-0026
  25. Tinetti ME. Performance-oriented assessment of mobility problems in elderly patients. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1986;34: 119-26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.1986.tb05480.x
  26. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2009.03.007
  27. Lamb SE, Ferrucci L, Volapto S, Fried LP, Guralnik JM; Women's Health and Aging Study. Risk factors for falling in home-dwelling older women with stroke: the Women's Health and Aging Study. Stroke. 2003;34: 494-501. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.str.0000053444.00582.b7
  28. Tyson SF, Hanley M, Chillala J, Selley A, Tallis RC. Balance disability after stroke. Phys Ther. 2006;86:30-8. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/86.1.30
  29. Fujita T, Sato A, Yamamoto Y, Otsuki K, Tsuchiya K, Tozato F. Motor Function Cutoff Values for Independent Dressing in Stroke Patients. Am J Occup Ther. 2016;70: 1-7.
  30. Wrisley DM, Kumar NA. Functional gait assessment: concurrent, discriminative, and predictive validity in community-dwelling older adults. Phys Ther. 2010;90: 761-73. https://doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20090069
  31. Leddy AL, Crowner BE, Earhart GM. Functional gait assessment and balance evaluation system test: reliability, validity, sensitivity, and specificity for identifying individuals with Parkinson disease who fall. Phys Ther. 2011;91:102-13. https://doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20100113
  32. Rodriquez AA, Black PO, Kile KA, et al. Gait training efficacy using a home-based practice model in chronic hemiplegia. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1996;77:801-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-9993(96)90260-9
  33. American Geriatrics Society, British Geriatrics Society, and American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons Panel on Falls Prevention. Guideline for the prevention of falls in older persons. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2001;49:664-72. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1532-5415.2001.49115.x
  34. Kollen B, Kwakkel G, Lindeman E. Time dependency of walking classification in stroke. Phys Ther. 2006;86: 618-25. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/86.5.618
  35. Robinett CS, Vondran MA. Functional ambulation velocity and distance requirements in rural and urban communities. A clinical report. Phys Ther. 1988;68: 1371-3. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/68.9.1371
  36. Bohannon RW. Gait performance of hemiparetic stroke patients: selected variables. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1987;68:777-81.
  37. Lamontagne A, Paquet N, Fung J. Postural adjustments to voluntary head motions during standing are modified following stroke. Clin Biomech. 2003;18:832-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0268-0033(03)00141-4
  38. Alzahrani MA, Dean CM, Ada L. Ability to negotiate stairs predicts free-living physical activity in community-dwelling people with stroke: an observational study. Aust J Physiother. 2009;55:277-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0004-9514(09)70008-X
  39. Shumway-Cook A, Patla AE, Stewart A, Ferrucci L, Ciol MA, Guralnik JM. Environmental demands associated with community mobility in older adults with and without mobility disorders. Phys Ther. 2002;82: 670-81. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/82.7.670