Aileen E Scully, Dawn Tan, Beatriz Ito Ramos de Oliveira, Keith D Hill, Ross Clark, Yong Hao Pua
{"title":"Scoring festination and gait freezing in people with Parkinson's: The freezing of gait severity tool-revised.","authors":"Aileen E Scully, Dawn Tan, Beatriz Ito Ramos de Oliveira, Keith D Hill, Ross Clark, Yong Hao Pua","doi":"10.1002/pri.2016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and purpose: </strong>To improve existing clinical assessments for freezing of gait (FOG) severity, a new clinician-rated tool which integrates the varied types of freezing (FOG Severity Tool-Revised) was developed. This cross-sectional study investigated its validity and reliability.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>People with Parkinson's disease who were able to independently ambulate eight-metres and understand study instructions were consecutively recruited from outpatient clinics of a tertiary hospital. Those with co-morbidities severely affecting gait were excluded. Participants were assessed with the FOG Severity Tool-Revised, three functional performance tests, the FOG Questionnaire, and outcomes measuring anxiety, cognition, and disability. The FOG Severity Tool-Revised was repeated for test-retest reliability. Exploratory factor analysis and Cronbach's alpha were computed for structural validity and internal consistency. Reliability and measurement error were estimated with ICC (two-way, random), standard error of measurement, and smallest detectable change (SDC<sub>95</sub> ). Criterion-related and construct validity were calculated with Spearman's correlations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-nine participants were enrolled [79.5% (n = 31) male; Median (IQR): age-73.0 (9.0) years; disease duration-4.0 (5.8) years], with fifteen (38.5%) who reported no medication state change contributing a second assessment for reliability estimation. The FOG Severity Tool-Revised demonstrated sufficient structural validity and internal consistency (α = 0.89-0.93), and adequate criterion-related validity compared to the FOG Questionnaire (ρ = 0.73, 95% CI 0.54-0.85). Test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.96, 95%CI 0.86-0.99) and random measurement error (%SDC<sub>95</sub> = 10.4%) was acceptable in this limited sample.</p><p><strong>Discussion and conclusions: </strong>The FOG Severity Tool-Revised appeared valid in this initial sample of people with Parkinson's. While its psychometric properties remain to be confirmed in a larger sample, it may be considered for use in the clinical setting.</p>","PeriodicalId":47243,"journal":{"name":"Physiotherapy Research International","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physiotherapy Research International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pri.2016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/5/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
Background and purpose: To improve existing clinical assessments for freezing of gait (FOG) severity, a new clinician-rated tool which integrates the varied types of freezing (FOG Severity Tool-Revised) was developed. This cross-sectional study investigated its validity and reliability.
Methods: People with Parkinson's disease who were able to independently ambulate eight-metres and understand study instructions were consecutively recruited from outpatient clinics of a tertiary hospital. Those with co-morbidities severely affecting gait were excluded. Participants were assessed with the FOG Severity Tool-Revised, three functional performance tests, the FOG Questionnaire, and outcomes measuring anxiety, cognition, and disability. The FOG Severity Tool-Revised was repeated for test-retest reliability. Exploratory factor analysis and Cronbach's alpha were computed for structural validity and internal consistency. Reliability and measurement error were estimated with ICC (two-way, random), standard error of measurement, and smallest detectable change (SDC95 ). Criterion-related and construct validity were calculated with Spearman's correlations.
Results: Thirty-nine participants were enrolled [79.5% (n = 31) male; Median (IQR): age-73.0 (9.0) years; disease duration-4.0 (5.8) years], with fifteen (38.5%) who reported no medication state change contributing a second assessment for reliability estimation. The FOG Severity Tool-Revised demonstrated sufficient structural validity and internal consistency (α = 0.89-0.93), and adequate criterion-related validity compared to the FOG Questionnaire (ρ = 0.73, 95% CI 0.54-0.85). Test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.96, 95%CI 0.86-0.99) and random measurement error (%SDC95 = 10.4%) was acceptable in this limited sample.
Discussion and conclusions: The FOG Severity Tool-Revised appeared valid in this initial sample of people with Parkinson's. While its psychometric properties remain to be confirmed in a larger sample, it may be considered for use in the clinical setting.
期刊介绍:
Physiotherapy Research International is an international peer reviewed journal dedicated to the exchange of knowledge that is directly relevant to specialist areas of physiotherapy theory, practice, and research. Our aim is to promote a high level of scholarship and build on the current evidence base to inform the advancement of the physiotherapy profession. We publish original research on a wide range of topics e.g. Primary research testing new physiotherapy treatments; methodological research; measurement and outcome research and qualitative research of interest to researchers, clinicians and educators. Further, we aim to publish high quality papers that represent the range of cultures and settings where physiotherapy services are delivered. We attract a wide readership from physiotherapists and others working in diverse clinical and academic settings. We aim to promote an international debate amongst the profession about current best evidence based practice. Papers are directed primarily towards the physiotherapy profession, but can be relevant to a wide range of professional groups. The growth of interdisciplinary research is also key to our aims and scope, and we encourage relevant submissions from other professional groups. The journal actively encourages submissions which utilise a breadth of different methodologies and research designs to facilitate addressing key questions related to the physiotherapy practice. PRI seeks to encourage good quality topical debates on a range of relevant issues and promote critical reflection on decision making and implementation of physiotherapy interventions.