{"title":"土耳其语版改进的老年人动态步态指数的信度和效度。","authors":"Emrah Zirek, Rustem Mustafaoglu, Aynur Cicek, Ishtiaq Ahmed, Savvas Mavromoustakos","doi":"10.1177/01632787221128311","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The modified Dynamic Gait Index (mDGI) is one of the valid instruments used in the evaluation of gait disorders. This study aimed to translate the mDGI into Turkish and evaluate the evidence for its reliability and validity for use in an elderly population. For test-retest reliability, the mDGI was administered twice, and for inter-rater reliability, the mDGI was administered alone on the same day by two raters. Concurrent validity of the mDGI was assessed using Pearson’s correlation analysis between the Turkish version of the mDGI score and the Timed Up and Go (TUG), Berg Balance Scale (BBS), and 10-m Walk Test (10-MWT), respectively. The internal consistency of the mDGI was found to be excellent (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.97) and test-retest (ICC = 0.95; 95% Cl (0.84–0.95)) and inter-rater reliability (ICC = 0.95; 95% Cl (0.85–0.95)) were excellent. A negative, moderate correlation was found between mDGI and TUG (r = −0.73, p < .0001), and a positive, moderate correlation with BBS (r = 0.71, p < .0001) and 10-MWT (r = 0.72, p < .0001). The Turkish version of the mDGI was found to be a valid and reliable assessment instrument for gait and balance in the elderly.","PeriodicalId":12315,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation & the Health Professions","volume":"46 2","pages":"135-139"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reliability and Validity of the Turkish Version of the Modified Dynamic Gait Index in the Elderly.\",\"authors\":\"Emrah Zirek, Rustem Mustafaoglu, Aynur Cicek, Ishtiaq Ahmed, Savvas Mavromoustakos\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/01632787221128311\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The modified Dynamic Gait Index (mDGI) is one of the valid instruments used in the evaluation of gait disorders. This study aimed to translate the mDGI into Turkish and evaluate the evidence for its reliability and validity for use in an elderly population. For test-retest reliability, the mDGI was administered twice, and for inter-rater reliability, the mDGI was administered alone on the same day by two raters. Concurrent validity of the mDGI was assessed using Pearson’s correlation analysis between the Turkish version of the mDGI score and the Timed Up and Go (TUG), Berg Balance Scale (BBS), and 10-m Walk Test (10-MWT), respectively. The internal consistency of the mDGI was found to be excellent (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.97) and test-retest (ICC = 0.95; 95% Cl (0.84–0.95)) and inter-rater reliability (ICC = 0.95; 95% Cl (0.85–0.95)) were excellent. A negative, moderate correlation was found between mDGI and TUG (r = −0.73, p < .0001), and a positive, moderate correlation with BBS (r = 0.71, p < .0001) and 10-MWT (r = 0.72, p < .0001). The Turkish version of the mDGI was found to be a valid and reliable assessment instrument for gait and balance in the elderly.\",\"PeriodicalId\":12315,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Evaluation & the Health Professions\",\"volume\":\"46 2\",\"pages\":\"135-139\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Evaluation & the Health Professions\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/01632787221128311\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evaluation & the Health Professions","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01632787221128311","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
改进的动态步态指数(mDGI)是评价步态障碍的有效工具之一。本研究旨在将mDGI翻译成土耳其语，并评估其在老年人群中使用的可靠性和有效性。为了测试-重测信度，mDGI进行了两次管理，为了评估者之间的信度，mDGI在同一天由两个评估者单独管理。mDGI的并发效度分别采用土耳其版mDGI评分与time Up and Go (TUG)、Berg Balance Scale (BBS)和10米步行测试(10-MWT)之间的Pearson相关分析进行评估。mDGI的内部一致性很好(Cronbach’s alpha = 0.97)，重测(ICC = 0.95;95% Cl(0.84-0.95))和评估间信度(ICC = 0.95;95% Cl(0.85 ~ 0.95))为优。mDGI与TUG呈负、中度相关(r = -0.73, p < 0.0001)，与BBS呈正、中度相关(r = 0.71, p < 0.0001)，与10-MWT呈正相关(r = 0.72, p < 0.0001)。土耳其版本的mDGI被认为是老年人步态和平衡的有效和可靠的评估工具。
Reliability and Validity of the Turkish Version of the Modified Dynamic Gait Index in the Elderly.
The modified Dynamic Gait Index (mDGI) is one of the valid instruments used in the evaluation of gait disorders. This study aimed to translate the mDGI into Turkish and evaluate the evidence for its reliability and validity for use in an elderly population. For test-retest reliability, the mDGI was administered twice, and for inter-rater reliability, the mDGI was administered alone on the same day by two raters. Concurrent validity of the mDGI was assessed using Pearson’s correlation analysis between the Turkish version of the mDGI score and the Timed Up and Go (TUG), Berg Balance Scale (BBS), and 10-m Walk Test (10-MWT), respectively. The internal consistency of the mDGI was found to be excellent (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.97) and test-retest (ICC = 0.95; 95% Cl (0.84–0.95)) and inter-rater reliability (ICC = 0.95; 95% Cl (0.85–0.95)) were excellent. A negative, moderate correlation was found between mDGI and TUG (r = −0.73, p < .0001), and a positive, moderate correlation with BBS (r = 0.71, p < .0001) and 10-MWT (r = 0.72, p < .0001). The Turkish version of the mDGI was found to be a valid and reliable assessment instrument for gait and balance in the elderly.
期刊介绍：
Evaluation & the Health Professions is a peer-reviewed, quarterly journal that provides health-related professionals with state-of-the-art methodological, measurement, and statistical tools for conceptualizing the etiology of health promotion and problems, and developing, implementing, and evaluating health programs, teaching and training services, and products that pertain to a myriad of health dimensions. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Average time from submission to first decision: 31 days
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
