Skip to main content
Egyptian Pediatric Association Gazette
Download PDF

Psychometric properties of the Edinburgh Visual Gait Score in children with spastic cerebral palsy

Egyptian Pediatric Association Gazette volume 71, Article number: 28 (2023) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

To our knowledge, no other studies investigated the internal consistency of the Edinburgh Visual Gait Score (EVGS). The aim of our study was to determine the reliability and construct validity of the EVGS in children with cerebral palsy (CP).

Results

A total of fifty children with CP were enrolled in the study. Participants were evaluated with Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS), Wisconsin Gait Scale (WGS), Gillette Functional Assessment Questionnaire (Gillette FAQ), Timed Up and Go Test (TUG), and EVGS (Rater-A and Rater-B). Slow-motion video analysis was used for the visual gait analysis. The inter-rater reliability, internal consistency, and construct validity of the EVGS were analyzed. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of the EVGS total score was 0.947 (CI: 0.90–0.97). Inter-rater reliability was excellent (ICC>0.80). The Cronbach’s alpha value was 0.936, within the acceptable range (0.70<α<0.95). In addition, the standard error of measurement (SEM95) and minimal detectable change (MDC95) scores of EVGS were 1.72 and 4.78, respectively. The correlation values of EVGS (Rater-A) and GMFCS, TUG, GFAQ, and WGS were 0.494, 0.661, −0.663, and 0.611, respectively. On the other hand, the correlation values of EVGS (Rater-B) and GMFCS, TUG, GFAQ, and WGS were 0.492, 0.664, −0.714, and 0.757, respectively. Except for comparison with GMFC, EVGS was highly valid in all other correlational analyzes (r>0.50). EVGS had moderate validity with GMFCS for both raters.

Conclusion

The EVGS was reliable and valid. Internal consistency of the EVGS is high, indicating a consistent structure to assess gait in children with CP.

Background

Cerebral palsy (CP) is a non-progressive loss of motor function, posture, and movement that restricts the movement due to fetal or perinatal damage to the developing brain [1]. The prevalence of CP in the world has been reported as 2–3 per 1000 live births [2, 3]. In Turkey, the prevalence has been reported as 4.4 per 1000 live births [4]. Permanent brain damage may develop with the emergence of risk factors in the etiology of CP in the prenatal, perinatal, and postnatal periods. The clinical progression may change over time depending on the child's development and other factors. Motor and sensory dysfunctions are common symptoms in children with CP [5]. As a result, the walking function is restricted to varying degrees. In a study by Shahid et al. on 96 children, it was stated that gait abnormalities vary according to the type of cerebral palsy and the condition of the child [6]. One of the essential physiotherapy and rehabilitation program goals in children with CP is to gain walking function. Therefore, visual gait analysis is crucial in the rehabilitation process. The visual gait analysis could be conducted by taking video-based recordings. Recordings taken from different angles such as sagittal, coronal, and vertical planes present detailed data on gait pathologies and provide more advantages than routine observation, owing to its features such as replaying in slow motion [7, 8]. The evaluation of gait function could be conducted with tools such as “Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS), Timed Up and Go Test (TUG), Gillette Functional Gait Assessment Questionnaire (Gillette FAQ) and Wisconsin Gait Scale (WGS)” [9]. However, no gait assessment tools are available in the clinical practice to provide satisfactory reliability in various gait problems and patterns in children with CP. “Edinburgh Visual Gait Score (EVGS)” is one of the most comprehensive gait analysis scoring systems used in children [10]. It is a proven method in clinical follow-up because it is cost-effective, easily accessible, and applicable in the clinical setting and allows repetitive recordings [7, 11, 12]. Studies have also found that EVGS is reliable and valid for use in children with CP [11, 13, 14]. EVGS was found to be valid and reliable in different case groups and studies. [15]. To our knowledge, no other studies investigated the internal consistency of EVGS. The present study aimed to evaluate the validity and reliability of the EVGS in children with CP.

Methods

Study design

The research was carried out in the Özel Son Atılım Special Education and Rehabilitation Center prospectively. Fifty children with cerebral palsy were enrolled. Children diagnosed with cerebral palsy and able to walk independently without an assistive device and orthosis were included in the study. Children who had undergone lower extremity orthopedic surgery in the last six months, who received botulinum toxin injection into the leg muscles in the last three months, and whose parents did not want to be included in the study without their consent, were not included in the study. The local ethics committee approved the study protocol (No: 210084-116). International adaptation stages were preferred for the translation of the EVGS [16, 17].

Sample size estimation

Considering the analysis results in a similar study, we calculated that at least 47 patients were required. “Gpower” program, was used with the effect size=0.40, type 1 error 0.05, power 0.90 [18]. The methods and recommendations of Read et al. were used in the investigation of inter-rater reliability and validity.

Study design

The children included in the study and their parents were given detailed information about the study and video recording, and their consent was obtained. Evaluation forms were filled under the supervision of the researcher. The physical and socio-demographical information (e.g., age, gender, height, weight, birth history, dystocia, walking time, and cerebral palsy type) were filled. The participants were evaluated with “Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS), Wisconsin Gait Scale (WGS), Gillette Functional Assessment Questionnaire (Gillette FAQ), Timed Up and Go Test (TUG), and EVGS (Rater-A and Rater-B)”. Video recording was conducted in a large treatment room using three video cameras. A flat 10-m pathway was determined as the patient’s walking line. The patients’ gait was recorded from 3 different angles (anterior, lateral, posterior). 2 physiotherapists watched the video recordings of 50 patients obtained from 3 different angles in slow motion with the Kinovea (open source) software and performed the scoring independently of each other [11, 19]. In this way, it was aimed to observe inter-rater reliability. In addition, EVGS was compared with GMFCS, WGS, Gillette FAQ, and TUG to evaluate the construct validity by comparing it with other clinical evaluations.

Edinburgh Visual Gait Score (EVGS)

EVGS evaluates different stages of the gait with video and analyzes the gait parameters quantitatively. It consists of 17 parameters and evaluates gait in three different planes. Six anatomical regions in each lower extremity are evaluated separately. In our study, the gait of all children was recorded with video from the lateral, anterior, and posterior directions. Then recordings were monitored in slow motion video technology. EVGS was measured by Rater A and Rater B (Both of the researchers were physiotherapists) independently in a computer environment. In scoring, a value of 0 indicates natural, 1 (or −1) and 2 (or −2) indicates moderate and severe deviation from normal, respectively [11].

Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS)

GMFCS evaluates child’s movements based on sitting, displacement, and mobility. Gross motor functionality was defined for each level in the “0–2 years, 2–4 years, 4–6 years, 6–12 years, 12–18 years” ranges [20].

Timed Up and Go Test (TUG)

TUG is a performance test that evaluates functional mobility, dynamic balance, and postural stability applied to different ages and individual groups. The activities in the test evaluate the transition from sitting to standing position, walking, turning, and sitting again, which are necessary for functional movements and the presence of dynamic balance. Timed stand up and walk test; evaluates different elements such as walking speed, postural control and functional mobility. In TUG, the individual was asked to get up from a chair with a backrest but no arm support, walk 3 meters at a safe and normal speed, turn, walk backwards, and sit on the chair [21].

Gillette Functional Assessment Questionnaire (Gillette FAQ)

Gillette FAQ is a walking scale with scores of “0” indicating that the child cannot take a step and cannot walk; “10” means that the child can walk, run, and go up and down stairs without assistance on all surfaces. Previously, Günel et al. adapted the scale in Turkish [22].

Wisconsin gait scale

The Wisconsin Gait Scale (WGS) can be used to evaluate the gait problems experienced by a patient with post-stroke hemiplegia. The minimum and maximum scores are 13.35–42, respectively. The higher the score, the more severely the gait is affected. Yalıman et al. (2014) conducted the Turkish version in patients with stroke [23]. This scale has recently been shown to be reliable in children as well [24].

Statistical analysis

“IBM SPSS Statistics Version 25 (SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL, USA)” computer package program was used for all statistical analyses. Descriptive statistical information was given as mean ± standard deviation (x±SD) or %. Cronbach’s alpha of ≥0.70 and <0.95 shows excellent internal consistency [25]. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used for inter-rater reliability. ICC greater than 0.80 indicates excellent reliability [26]. The minimal detectable change (MDC95) and the standard error of measurement (SEM95) were calculated regarding the following equations (1) and (2), respectively [27]:

$${\mathrm{MDC}}_{95}= 1.96*\mathrm{SEM}*\surd 2$$
(1)
$${\mathrm{SEM}}_{95}=\mathrm{SD}*\surd (1-\mathrm{ICC})$$
(2)

The construct validity was calculated for the EVGS by comparing it with the GMFCS, WGS, Gillette FAQ, and TUG. The correlation between the questionnaire score was considered strong if the coefficient was greater than 0.5 [28].

Results

Fifty children with cerebral palsy (60% female, 40% male) with a mean age of 11.7±4.6 were included in the study. The children's body mass index and the age of gaining walking ability were 19.6±5.8 kg/m2 and 13.6±3.3 months, respectively. Half of the participants (50%) had monoplegia-type cerebral palsy. Detailed information about the individual characteristics of children is given in Table 1. Table 2 shows the clinical measurement results. The mean EVGS of the two raters (Rater-A, Rater-B) were 9.8±7.5 and 5.9±8.4, respectively. The scores of both raters were between 0 and 31. In Table 3, the results of the reliability analysis are presented. The ICC value of the EVGS total score was 0.947 (CI: 0.90–0.97). Inter-rater reliability was excellent (ICC>0.80). The ICC value of EVGS items varied between 0.42 and 0.89. The Cronbach's alpha value, which indicates the internal consistency of the EGVS, was 0.936, that is, within the acceptable range (0.70< α <0.95). The alpha values of the items ranged from 0.929 to 0.940. In addition, the SEM95 and MDC95 scores of EVGS were 1.72 and 4.78, respectively.

Table 1 The individual characteristics of the participants
Full size table
Table 2 The mean values of the clinical evaluations
Full size table
Table 3 The reliability of the EVGS
Full size table

Table 4 shows the construct validity results of the EVGS. EVGS values of Rater-A and Rater-B were compared with GMFCS, TUG, GFAQ, and WGS. The correlation values of EVGS (Rater-A) and GMFCS, TUG, GFAQ, and WGS were 0.494, 0.661, −0.663, and 0.611, respectively. On the other hand, the correlation values of EVGS (Rater-B) and GMFCS, TUG, GFAQ, and WGS were 0.492, 0.664, −0.714, and 0.757, respectively. Except for comparison with GMFC, EVGS was highly valid in all other correlational analyzes (r>0.50). EVGS had moderate validity with GMFCS for both raters.

Table 4 The results of the construct validity
Full size table

Discussion

The present study aimed to demonstrate the reliability and validity of the EVGS. No other studies investigated the internal consistency of EVGS. EVGS was found to be reliable and valid. So far, several studies have focused on the psychometric properties of the EVGS, demonstrating the validity and reliability of this standardized tool. However, internal consistency of the EVGS had analyzed first time in our study regarding the guidelines of the COSMIN [29].

Some EVGS studies in the literature should be briefly mentioned. Read et al. in the development study and Ong et al. in another study emphasized that EVGS was reliable with kappa analysis and Bland-Altman plot analysis, respectively [11, 14]. Hillman et al. emphasized that EVGS is a valid tool with a correlation of 05 to 0.8 with other clinical measurements [30]. Another study stated that EVGS could be used in longitudinal measurements with a single evaluator evaluation [31]. Viehweger et al. claimed that EVGS could provide an alternative to laboratory measurements [32]. The MCID value and responsiveness analysis of EVGS have also been recently presented [33, 34]. In a pilot study, the usability and reliability of the EVGS in Children with CP by slow-motion video technology were presented in detail [35]. Therefore, we pragmatically preferred to analyze with slow-motion video technique in our study.

The 50 children with cerebral palsy included in our study consisted of diplegic, hemiplegic and monoplegic individuals. Studying with a sample including the hemiplegic or diplegic group alone could have produced more homogeneous results. However, our focus was to obtain a valid and reliable psychometric analysis study in all children with cerebral palsy, appealing to a broader audience. In this respect, we retained the sample and inclusion criteria a bit wide. Half of the participants (50%) had monoplegic-type cerebral palsy. In this respect, it should be noted that the children in our sample are a group with relatively moderate gait disturbance.

The ICC analysis performed by comparing the measurements of the two raters (Rater-A, Rater-B) was 0.947 (CI: 0.90–0.97) for the total EVGS score. Inter-rater reliability was excellent (ICC>0.80). In other words, there was a high level of reliability in that different evaluators gave similar results for the same clinical case. The ICC scores of the items showed variation. The ICC value of EVGS items varied between 0.42 and 0.89. According to the guidelines, ICC values between 0.4 and 0.6 indicate moderate reliability [26]. Items 8, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17 had moderate reliability, while other items had high and excellent reliability. Item 8 represents the knee progression angle. The difficulty for clinicians to interpret the kneecap position with slowed video may have caused the situation. Although the validity and reliability of the analysis with slowed video for EVGS had been demonstrated, we interpreted that this situation may create a handicap. It should be noted that items 12-17 include the analysis of the hip-pelvis-trunk girdle, and its reliability can be more difficult to interpret than other limb regions (foot, knee) [11].

The Cronbach's alpha value showing the internal consistency of the EGVS was 0.936, that is, within the acceptable range (0.70< α <0.95). The alpha values of the items ranged from 0.929 to 0.940. Edinburgh has high internal consistency both in terms of total score and items. Considering that this tool was developed only to evaluate gait evaluation, high alpha scores are expected. However, especially items 12–17. has a low ICC value. The high internal consistency of the items enabled us to obtain a result that clarifies the reliability a little more [27]. In addition, the SEM95 and MDC95 scores of EVGS were 1.72 and 4.78, respectively. MDC value can be beneficial for physiotherapists, especially in the rehabilitation process of cerebral palsy. It is thought that the changes in scores of “4” and above to be obtained from EVGS with the different treatment modalities given may be a clinically significant change. On the other hand, it should be noted that this measurement may vary according to the sample standard deviation value, and this value may vary for cases with a relatively severe clinical presentation [27].

The construct validity results of the EVGS revealed a high degree of validity. The correlation values of EVGS (Rater-A) and GMFCS, TUG, GFAQ, and WGS were 0.494, 0.661, −0.663, and 0.611, respectively. On the other hand, the correlation values of EVGS (Rater-B) and GMFCS, TUG, GFAQ, and WGS were 0.492, 0.664, −0.714, and 0.757, respectively. Except for comparison with GMFC, EVGS was highly valid in all other correlational analyzes (r>0.50). EVGS had moderate validity with GMFCS for both raters. These results are precious in that they are all clinician-based measurements. Correlation with GMFCS was relatively low. We thought that this situation might have arisen due to the classification with a single item. The correlation with WGS was invaluable. WGS, which was found to be valid and reliable in the CP group [23], is the most viable alternative to EVGS. Therefore, we added originality to the construct validity in our study.

By addressing some of the study's limitations, it is necessary to offer some hints to researchers who will study more EVGS from now on. First of all, we did not apply intra-rater reliability or responsiveness in our study. Especially since these methods require a follow-up process for children, we could not perform these analyzes. It may be necessary for the same evaluator to present similar results for the same case at different times to present the questionnaire's intra-rater reliability. Using the MDC value, we have calculated, it can be a valuable clinical outcome to follow the long-term treatment results of individuals and the clinical significance of the score change. Finally, we were unable to compare slowed visual video with a wearable sensor-based analysis. It should be noted that this situation may further strengthen our results.

Conclusion and recommendations

The EVGS was found to be reliable and valid. Internal consistency of the EVGS is high, indicating a consistent structure to assess gait in children with CP. EVGS should be pragmatically used in clinical practice, where gait analysis laboratory is not available.

Availability of data and materials

Data will be made available by the corresponding author to the editor after a request email from the editor. The reason for sharing the data should be justified, and it will be shared after all the authors approve the same.

Abbreviations

GMFCS:

Gross Motor Function Classification System

WGS:

Wisconsin Gait Scale

Gillette FAQ:

Gillette Functional Assessment Questionnaire

TUG:

Timed Up and Go Test

EVGS:

Edinburgh Visual Gait Score

References

  1. Ibrahim AI, Muaidi QI, Alghamde AA (2018) Abnormalities of vital signs in children with cerebral palsy: relationship to physical disabilities. J Dev Phys Disabil 30:55–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Vitrikas K, Dalton H, Breish D (2020) Cerebral palsy: an overview. Am Fam Physician 101:213–220

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Garza DFF, Cantu OE, Sandoval GM, Jau RAG, Pascual JB, Elizondo JE, Rangel SS, Solis-Soto JM (2021) Cerebral palsy, an odontological point of view. Int J App Dent Sci 7:357–360

    Google Scholar 

  4. Serdaroǧlu A, Cansu A, Özkan S, Tezcan S (2006) Prevalence of cerebral palsy in Turkish children between the ages of 2 and 16 years. Dev Med Child Neurology 48:413–416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Seyhan K, Çankaya Ö, Şimşek TT, Günel MK (2018) Investigation of intra-observer reliability and validity of the gillette functional walking assessment questionnaire in children with cerebral palsy. Turk Physiother Rehabil J 29:73–78

    Google Scholar 

  6. Shahid S, Shoukat F, Shakeel H, Tauqeer S, Manzoor Z (2021) Prevalence of gait abnormalities in children with cerebral palsy. Rawal Med J 46:152–154

    Google Scholar 

  7. Kawamura CM, de Morais Filho MC, Barreto MM, de Paula Asa SK, Juliano Y, Novo NF (2007) Comparison between visual and three-dimensional gait analysis in patients with spastic diplegic cerebral palsy. Gait Posture. 25:18–24

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kulkarni VA, Kephart D, Olleac R, Davids J (2020) Enhancing Observational Gait Analysis–Techniques and Tips for Analyzing Gait Without a Gait Lab. JPOSNA 2 (3)

  9. Akalan NE, Temelli Y (2014) The role and usability of observational gait analysis in cerebral paresis. J Health Sci Prof 1:28–45

    Google Scholar 

  10. Harvey A, Gorter JW (2011) Video gait analysis for ambulatory children with cerebral palsy: why, when, where and how! Gait Posture 33:501–503

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Read HS, Hazlewood ME, Hillman SJ, Prescott RJ, Robb JE (2003) Edinburgh visual gait score for use in cerebral palsy. J Pediatr Orthop 23:296–301

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Tzikalagia T, Ramdharry G (2017) Using the Edinburgh visual gait score to assess gait in children with cerebral palsy: a feasibility evaluation. Int J Ther Rehabil 24:419–426

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Orozco MdPD, Abousamra O, Church C, Lennon N, Henley J, Rogers KJ, Sees JP, Connor J, Miller F (2016) Reliability and validity of Edinburgh visual gait score as an evaluation tool for children with cerebral palsy. Gait Posture 49:14–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ong A, Hillman S, Robb J (2008) Reliability and validity of the Edinburgh visual gait score for cerebral palsy when used by inexperienced observers. Gait Posture 28:323–326

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Booth AT, Buizer AI, Meyns P, Oude Lansink IL, Steenbrink F, van der Krogt MM (2018) The efficacy of functional gait training in children and young adults with cerebral palsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Dev Med Child Neurology 60:866–883

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB (2000) Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine 25:3186–3191

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D (1993) Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol 46:1417–1432

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang A-G, Buchner A (2007) G* Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods 39:175–191

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Fernández-González P, Koutsou A, Cuesta-Gómez A, Carratalá-Tejada M, Miangolarra-Page JC, Molina-Rueda F (2020) Reliability of kinovea® software and agreement with a three-dimensional motion system for gait analysis in healthy subjects. Sensors 20:3154

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Russell DJ, Avery LM, Rosenbaum PL, Raina PS, Walter SD, Palisano RJ (2000) Improved scaling of the gross motor function measure for children with cerebral palsy: evidence of reliability and validity. Phys Ther 80:873–885

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Carey H, Martin K, Combs-Miller S, Heathcock JC (2016) Reliability and responsiveness of the timed up and go test in children with cerebral palsy. Pediatr Phys Ther 28:401–408

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Gunel MK, Tarsuslu T, Mutlu A, Livanelioglu A (2010) Investigation of interobserver reliability of the gillette functional assessment questionnaire in children with spastic diparetic cerebral palsy. Acta Orthopedica Traumatologica Turcica 44:63–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Yaliman A, Kesiktas N, Ozkaya M, Eskiyurt N, Erkan O, Yilmaz E (2014) Evaluation of intrarater and interrater reliability of the Wisconsin Gait Scale with using the video taped stroke patients in a Turkish sample. NeuroRehabil 34:253–258

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Guzik A, Drużbicki M, Kwolek A, Przysada G, Bazarnik-Mucha K, Szczepanik M, Wolan-Nieroda A, Sobolewski M (2018) The paediatric version of Wisconsin gait scale, adaptation for children with hemiplegic cerebral palsy: a prospective observational study. BMC Pediatr 18:1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, Bouter LM, de Vet HC (2007) Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 60:34–42

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Baumgartner TA, Chung H (2001) Confidence limits for intraclass reliability coefficients. Measure Phys Educ Exerc Sci 5:179–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Portney LG, Watkins MP (2009) Foundations of clinical research: applications to practice, vol 892. Pearson/Prentice Hall Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  28. Juniper EF (1996) How to develop and validate a new health-related quality of life instrument. Quality of life and pharamacoeconomics in clinical trials:49-56

  29. Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Knol DL, Stratford PW, Alonso J, Patrick DL, Bouter LM, De Vet HC (2010) The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: a clarification of its content. BMC Med Res Methodol 10:1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Hillman SJ, Hazlewood ME, Schwartz MH, Van Der Linden ML, Robb JE (2007) Correlation of the Edinburgh gait score with the Gillette gait index, the Gillette functional assessment questionnaire, and dimensionless speed. J Pediatr Orthop 27:7–11

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Maathuis KG, van der Schans CP, Van Iperen A, Rietman HS, Geertzen JH (2005) Gait in children with cerebral palsy: observer reliability of physician rating scale and Edinburgh visual gait analysis interval testing scale. J Pediatr Orthop 25:268–272

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Viehweger E, Pfund LZ, Hélix M, Rohon M-A, Jacquemier M, Scavarda D, Jouve J-L, Bollini G, Loundou A, Simeoni M-C (2010) Influence of clinical and gait analysis experience on reliability of observational gait analysis (Edinburgh Gait Score Reliability). Ann Phys Rehabil Med 53:535–546

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Robinson L, Clement N, Herman J, Gaston M (2017) The Edinburgh visual gait score–The minimal clinically important difference. Gait Posture 53:25–28

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Gupta S, Raja K (2012) Responsiveness of Edinburgh Visual Gait Score to orthopedic surgical intervention of the lower limbs in children with cerebral palsy. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 91:761–767

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Aroojis A, Sagade B, Chand S (2021) Usability and reliability of the edinburgh visual gait score in children with spastic cerebral palsy using smartphone slow-motion video technology and a motion analysis application: a pilot study. Indian J Orthop:1-8

Download references

Acknowledgements

None.

Funding

None

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Fethiye Vocational School of Health Services, Health Care Services Department, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, Muğla, Turkey

    İsmail Uysal

  2. Köyceğiz Vocational School of Health Services, Health Care Services Department, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, Muğla, Turkey

    Fatih Özden & Serap Tuna

  3. Institute of Health Sciences, Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation Department, Süleyman Demirel University, Isparta, Turkey

    İsmet Tümtürk

Authors
  1. İsmail Uysal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Fatih Özden
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Serap Tuna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. İsmet Tümtürk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

İU: Study conception and design, data collection, analysis and interpretation of results, draft manuscript preparation. FÖ: Study conception and design, data collection, analysis and interpretation of results, draft manuscript preparation. ST: Study conception and design, data collection, analysis, and interpretation of results. İT: Data collection, analysis, and interpretation of results. The author(s) read and approved the final manuscript.

Authors’ information

İsmail Uysal,PhD (Corresponding Author), Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, Fethiye Vocational School of Health Services, Health Care Services Department, Muğla, Turkey

Fatih Özden, PhD, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, Köyceğiz Vocational School of Health Services, Health Care Services Department, Muğla, Turkey

Serap Tuna, PhD, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, Köyceğiz Vocational School of Health Services, Health Care Services Department, Muğla, Turkey

İsmet Tümtürk, MSc, Süleyman Demirel University, Institute of Health Sciences, Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation Department, Isparta, Turkey

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fatih Özden.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study was carried out in accordance with the ethical principles and the Helsinki Declaration. Informed consents of the patients were obtained. The study protocol was approved by the ethics committee of Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University (No:210084-116).

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors report no conflicts of interest and certify that no funding has been received for this study and/or preparation of this manuscript.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Uysal, İ., Özden, F., Tuna, S. et al. Psychometric properties of the Edinburgh Visual Gait Score in children with spastic cerebral palsy. Egypt Pediatric Association Gaz 71, 28 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s43054-023-00175-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s43054-023-00175-w

Keywords