Brazilian version of the Functional Gait Assessment: translation, reliability, and validity for use on stroke patients

  • Fonseca P
  • Da Silva K
  • Donato do Vale V
  • et al.
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
6Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective. Translate and adapt the Functional Gait Assessment (FGA) to Brazilian Portuguese as a measure of balance during gait in stroke patients and determine its validity and reliability based on evidence of its measurement properties. Method. A convenience sample of 45 stroke survivors (average of seven months since diagnosis) was included (mean age: 55 years; 51% women). The instrument under consideration was translated and back-translated. The performance of the FGA was assessed by two raters to determine intrarater and interrater reliability. Concurrent and discriminant validity were investigated using the Berg Balance Scale (BBS) as well as normal and fast walking speed. Results. No difficulties with the translation were found during the application of the tests. Therefore, no structural or conceptual changes to the translated version were needed to achieve cultural equivalence. Intrarater (intraclass correlation coefficient=0.93) and interrater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient=0.90) were almost perfect for the total scores. The reliability of single items was also strong, ranging from 0.74 to 0.95. Concurrent validity with other measures of gait and balance was moderate to substantial. The FGA was correlated (p<0.001) with the BBS (0.71), normal walking speed (0.66), and fast walking speed (0.70). Conclusion. The Brazilian version of the FGA is a reliable, valid instrument for assessing functional gait performance in stroke survivors.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Fonseca, P., Da Silva, K. A., Donato do Vale, V., Santos Oliveira, C., & Dos Santos Alves, V. L. (2021). Brazilian version of the Functional Gait Assessment: translation, reliability, and validity for use on stroke patients. Revista Neurociências, 29, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.34024/rnc.2021.v29.10735

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free