Concurrent Validity of Two Gait Performance Measures in Children with Neuromotor Disorders

Corinne Ammann-Reiffer*, Caroline H. G. Bastiaenen, Corina Kloeti, Hubertus J. A. van Hedel

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

5 Citations (Web of Science)


Aims: To investigate the concurrent validity of two mobility performance measures, the Functional Mobility Scale (FMS) and the Gillette Functional Assessment Questionnaire - walking scale (FAQ) in an inpatient pediatric neurorehabilitation setting. Methods: Cross-sectional data were collected on 71 children (mean age 12.7 years) with neuromotor gait impairments who participated in an inpatient rehabilitation program to evaluate aspects of concurrent validity of the FMS and FAQ. Physiotherapists independently performed ratings. Comparator instruments included the walking item of the Functional Independence Measure for children, 10-m and 6-minute walking tests, and Gross Motor Function Measure-88 dimension E. All tests were completed within 7 days. Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated to test a priori formulated hypotheses regarding the strength and direction of the measures relationships. Results: The children had a broad spectrum of mobility levels, including all levels of FMS and levels 2-10 of FAQ. Spearman correlation coefficients with comparator measures varied between 0.58-0.79 for the FMS and 0.69-0.73 for the FAQ. Hypotheses concerning correlation strengths and directions were met for FMS and FAQ. Conclusions: The findings demonstrate that the FMS and FAQ are valid to evaluate functional mobility in pediatric inpatient neurorehabilitation.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)181-192
Number of pages12
JournalPhysical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 4 Mar 2019


  • Children
  • functional mobility scale
  • Gillette functional Assessment Questionnaire - walking scale
  • mobility
  • outcome assessment
  • psychometric testing
  • validity

Cite this