2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2015.04.019
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Gait Deviation Index, Gait Profile Score and Gait Variable Score in children with spastic cerebral palsy: Intra-rater reliability and agreement across two repeated sessions

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
41
0
5

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 60 publications
(49 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
3
41
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…We found an interclass correlation (ICC) of 0.98 and a standard error of measurement (SEM) of 1.05. These results are similar to those of Rasmussen et al [35] who assessed reliability of the GPS by assessing 18 patients with spastic CP on two occasions within a 10 day period and found an ICC of 0.88 and a SEM of 1.09.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…We found an interclass correlation (ICC) of 0.98 and a standard error of measurement (SEM) of 1.05. These results are similar to those of Rasmussen et al [35] who assessed reliability of the GPS by assessing 18 patients with spastic CP on two occasions within a 10 day period and found an ICC of 0.88 and a SEM of 1.09.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…This is the first study that provides evidence about spatial-temporal gait parameters after treatment with nabiximols and the first that evaluates the whole kinematic effects in MS after an antispasticity drug treatment. The reliability of the three-dimensional gait analysis is generally considered very high, and the changes in both spatial-temporal and kinematic variables observed are definitely higher than the test-retest variability [24][25][26], thus indicating that the variations in the gait parameters are actually due to the nabiximols treatment.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…19 GDI is based upon kinematic data from the gait analysis (step 1) and summarizes the overall gait pathology into a single score when compared with non-pathological gait. 20 The median of five trials for each leg was used to calculate the average of both legs to provide a single index for each child. 20 The median of five trials for each leg was used to calculate the average of both legs to provide a single index for each child.…”
Section: Outcome Measuresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…20 Furthermore, a minimum clinically important difference in GDI was a priori defined as 7.9, which is equivalent to an improvement of 10%, as suggested by Schwartz et al 24 Therefore, a minimum of 29 participants in each group (n=58) was required with alpha of 0.05 and 80% power. The sample size was based on data from a previous study performed in our laboratory demonstrating a group mean GDI of 79.3 (standard deviation 12.0).…”
Section: Statisticsmentioning
confidence: 99%