SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Assessment of the psychometric properties of the Italian version of the New Freezing of Gait Questionnaire (NFOG-Q-IT) in people with Parkinson disease: a validity and reliability study.

Neurol Sci · 2023-04-18

DOI: 10.1007/s10072-023-06800-1PMID: 37072581

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

IntroductionFreezing of gait (FOG) in Parkinson's disease (PD) is a challenging clinical symptom to assess, due to its episodic nature. A valid and reliable tool is the New FOG Questionnaire (NFOG-Q) used worldwide to measure FOG symptoms in PD.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to translate, to culturally adapt, and to test the psychometric characteristics of the Italian version of the NFOG-Q (NFOG-Q-It).MethodsThe translation and cultural adaptation was based on ISPOR TCA guidelines to finalize the 9-item NFOG-Q-It. Internal consistency was assessed in 181 Italian PD native speakers who experienced FOG using Cronbach's alpha. Cross-cultural analysis was tested using the Spearman's correlation between the NFOG-Q-It and the Modified Hoehn-Yahr Scale (M-H&Y). To assess construct validity, correlations among NFOG-Q-It, Movement Disorder Society-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS), Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), the Falls Efficacy Scale-International (FES-I), the 6-min Walking Test (6MWT), the Mini Balance Evaluation System Test (Mini-BESTest) and the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) were investigated.ResultsThe Italian N-FOGQ had high internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.859). Validity analysis showed significant correlations between NFOG-Q-IT total score and M-H&Y scores (r = 0.281 p ConclusionThe NFOG-It is a valuable and reliable tool for assessing FOG symptoms, duration and frequency in PD subjects. Results provide the validity of NFOG-Q-It by reproducing and enlarging previous psychometric data.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.