BACKGROUND: The gold standards for assessing ambulation are the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) and the Timed 25-Foot Walk (T25FW) test. In relation with these measures, we assessed the reliability and validity of four clinical gait measures: the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test, the Dynamic Gait Index (DGI), the 2-Minute Walk Test (2MWT), and the 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT). Patient self-report of gait was also assessed using the 12-item Multiple Sclerosis Walking Scale (MSWS-12). METHODS: Individuals 20 years or older with a diagnosis of multiple sclerosis (MS) and an EDSS score of 2.0 to 6.5 completed the MSWS-12, T25FW test, TUG test, DGI, 2MWT, and 6MWT. All the tests were repeated 2 weeks later at the same time of day to establish their reliability and concurrent validity. Predictive validity was established using the EDSS. RESULTS: Forty-two patients with MS were included. All measures showed high test-retest reliability. The TUG test, 2MWT, and 6MWT were significantly correlated with the T25FW test (Spearman ρ = -0.902, -0.919, and -0.905, respectively). The EDSS was also significantly correlated with all the walking tests. The MSWS-12 demonstrated the highest correlation to the EDSS (ρ = 0.788). CONCLUSIONS: The TUG test, the DGI, the 2MWT, and the 6MWT exhibited strong psychometric properties and were found to be significant predictors of the EDSS score. Use of these tests to prospectively monitor the effects of medical and rehabilitation treatment should be considered in the comprehensive care of patients with MS.
BACKGROUND: The gold standards for assessing ambulation are the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) and the Timed 25-Foot Walk (T25FW) test. In relation with these measures, we assessed the reliability and validity of four clinical gait measures: the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test, the Dynamic Gait Index (DGI), the 2-Minute Walk Test (2MWT), and the 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT). Patient self-report of gait was also assessed using the 12-item Multiple Sclerosis Walking Scale (MSWS-12). METHODS: Individuals 20 years or older with a diagnosis of multiple sclerosis (MS) and an EDSS score of 2.0 to 6.5 completed the MSWS-12, T25FW test, TUG test, DGI, 2MWT, and 6MWT. All the tests were repeated 2 weeks later at the same time of day to establish their reliability and concurrent validity. Predictive validity was established using the EDSS. RESULTS: Forty-two patients with MS were included. All measures showed high test-retest reliability. The TUG test, 2MWT, and 6MWT were significantly correlated with the T25FW test (Spearman ρ = -0.902, -0.919, and -0.905, respectively). The EDSS was also significantly correlated with all the walking tests. The MSWS-12 demonstrated the highest correlation to the EDSS (ρ = 0.788). CONCLUSIONS: The TUG test, the DGI, the 2MWT, and the 6MWT exhibited strong psychometric properties and were found to be significant predictors of the EDSS score. Use of these tests to prospectively monitor the effects of medical and rehabilitation treatment should be considered in the comprehensive care of patients with MS.
Authors: N F Kalkers; V de Groot; R H Lazeron; J Killestein; H J Adèr; F Barkhof; G J Lankhorst; C H Polman Journal: Neurology Date: 2000-03-28 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Aseel Bin Sawad; Enrique Seoane-Vazquez; Rosa Rodriguez-Monguio; Fatema Turkistani Journal: Curr Med Res Opin Date: 2016-09-07 Impact factor: 2.580
Authors: Mark S Freedman; Daniel Selchen; Douglas L Arnold; Alexandre Prat; Brenda Banwell; Michael Yeung; David Morgenthau; Yves Lapierre Journal: Can J Neurol Sci Date: 2013-05 Impact factor: 2.104
Authors: Chris H Polman; Stephen C Reingold; Brenda Banwell; Michel Clanet; Jeffrey A Cohen; Massimo Filippi; Kazuo Fujihara; Eva Havrdova; Michael Hutchinson; Ludwig Kappos; Fred D Lublin; Xavier Montalban; Paul O'Connor; Magnhild Sandberg-Wollheim; Alan J Thompson; Emmanuelle Waubant; Brian Weinshenker; Jerry S Wolinsky Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2011-02 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Mikaela L Frechette; Brett M Meyer; Lindsey J Tulipani; Reed D Gurchiek; Ryan S McGinnis; Jacob J Sosnoff Journal: Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep Date: 2019-09-04 Impact factor: 5.081
Authors: Katherine Hope Kenyon; Frederique Boonstra; Gustavo Noffs; Helmut Butzkueven; Adam P Vogel; Scott Kolbe; Anneke van der Walt Journal: Cerebellum Date: 2022-06-27 Impact factor: 3.648
Authors: Antonio Bustos; Pablo Selvi Sabater; María Benlloch; Eraci Drehmer; María Mar López-Rodríguez; Felix Platero; Jose Luis Platero; Jesús Escribá-Alepuz; Jose Enrique de la Rubia Ortí Journal: Medicina (Kaunas) Date: 2021-01-24 Impact factor: 2.430
Authors: Viktoria Karle; Verena Hartung; Keti Ivanovska; Mathias Mäurer; Peter Flachenecker; Klaus Pfeifer; Alexander Tallner Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-12-04 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Pim van Oirschot; Marco Heerings; Karine Wendrich; Bram den Teuling; Frank Dorssers; René van Ee; Marijn Bart Martens; Peter Joseph Jongen Journal: JMIR Form Res Date: 2021-11-17
Authors: J Marsden; M Pavlou; R Dennett; A Gibbon; R Knight-Lozano; L Jeu; C Flavell; J Freeman; D E Bamiou; C Harris; A Hawton; E Goodwin; B Jones; S Creanor Journal: BMC Neurol Date: 2020-11-27 Impact factor: 2.474