Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 21, 2026

Motor Dual-Tasks for Gait Analysis and Evaluation in Post-Stroke Patients
Published on: March 11, 2021
Dual-scale assessment of motor dysfunction in older adults with locomotor dysfunction and its association with gait
Wen Liu1, Chunxiao Lu2, Lifeng Qian1
1Department of Rehabilitation, Jiaxing Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jiaxing, Zhejiang, China.
Objective:
This study examined the reliability and validity of a combined 25-question geriatric locomotive function scale (GLFS-25) and Locomotion Dysfunction Grade scale (LDG) classification protocol in older adults with locomotor dysfunction, and explored which objective gait and muscle activation parameters were most strongly associated with GLFS-25 scores.
Methods:
The GLFS-25 and LDG were used to assess 289 older adults with locomotor dysfunction, of whom 60 underwent gait analysis and surface electromyography (sEMG).
Results:
Reliability analysis yielded a Cronbach's α of 0.702 for the GLFS-25, indicating acceptable but modest internal consistency. Exploratory factor analysis extracted nine factors, accounting for 55.193% of the cumulative variance. Confirmatory factor analysis showed X2/df = 1.424, RMSEA = 0.038 (90% CI: 0.000-0.060), and SRMR = 0.055, indicating acceptable fit; however, CFI = 0.821, TLI = 0.801, and IFI = 0.830 were below 0.90, suggesting partial rather than strong construct validity. In exploratory ridge regression, the model showed an in-sample R2 of 0.858, which should be interpreted with caution. Step length showed a positive association with the GLFS-25 score, while knee flexion during swing and the ratio of pressure onset time of the middle foot showed negative associations (P < 0.05). However, individual coefficients should be interpreted cautiously.
Conclusion:
The GLFS-25 demonstrated acceptable but modest reliability and partial construct validity in this population. In exploratory analyses, its scores showed a strong in-sample association with objective gait and sEMG measures. These findings are hypothesis-generating and require external validation in independent cohorts. Objective measures remain complementary to, rather than substitutes for, subjective assessment. Registration: ChiCTR2400087701.

