4.5 Article

The Utility of Gait Deviation Index (GDI) and Gait Variability Index (GVI) in Detecting Gait Changes in Spastic Hemiplegic Cerebral Palsy Children Using Ankle-Foot Orthoses (AFO)

Journal

CHILDREN-BASEL
Volume 7, Issue 10, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/children7100149

Keywords

gait analysis; cerebral palsy; gait variablity index; gait deviation index; ankle-foot orthosis

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Cerebral palsy (CP) children present complex and heterogeneous motor disorders that cause gait deviations. Clinical gait analysis (CGA) is used to identify, understand and support the management of gait deviations in CP. Children with CP often use ankle-foot orthosis (AFO) to facilitate and optimize their walking ability. The aim of this study was to assess whether the gait deviation index (GDI) and the gait variability index (GVI) results can reflect the changes of spatio-temporal and kinematic gait parameters in spastic hemiplegic CP children wearing AFO. Method: The study group consisted of 37 CP children with hemiparesis. All had undergone a comprehensive, instrumented gait analysis while walking, both barefoot and with their AFO, during the same CGA session. Kinematic and spatio-temporal data were collected and GVI and GDI gait indexes were calculated. Results: Significant differences were found between the barefoot condition and the AFO conditions for selected spatio-temporal and kinematic gait parameters. Changes in GVI and GDI were also statistically significant. Conclusions: The use of AFO in hemiplegic CP children caused a statistically significant improvement in spatio-temporal and kinematic gait parameters. It was found that these changes were also reflected by GVI and GDI. These findings might suggest that gait indices, such as GDI and GVI, as clinical outcome measures, may reflect the effects of specific therapeutic interventions in CP children.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available