Validity of the EK scale: a functional assessment of non-ambulatory individuals with Duchenne muscular dystrophy or spinal muscular atrophy
Version of Record online: 17 MAR 2006
Copyright © 2001 Whurr Publishers Ltd.
Physiotherapy Research International
Volume 6, Issue 3, pages 119–134, August 2001
How to Cite
Steffensen, B., Hyde, S., Lyager, S. and Mattsson, E. (2001), Validity of the EK scale: a functional assessment of non-ambulatory individuals with Duchenne muscular dystrophy or spinal muscular atrophy. Physiother. Res. Int., 6: 119–134. doi: 10.1002/pri.221
- Issue online: 17 MAR 2006
- Version of Record online: 17 MAR 2006
- Manuscript Accepted: FEB 2001
- Duchenne muscular dystrophy;
- EK scale;
- functional assessment;
- spinal muscular atrophy;
Background and Purpose
The EK scale comprises ten categories (EK 1–10), each contributing to an overall picture of function in the non-ambulatory stage of Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD). The purpose of the present study was to investigate content and construct validity of the EK scale as a tool to discriminate between levels of functional ability in individuals with DMD or spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) who were non-ambulatory.
Data from a sample of 56 subjects with DMD and 38 with SMA, who were non-ambulatory, were obtained from four separate studies. The relationship of functional ability by use of the EK scale and (1) muscle strength, (2) contractures, (3) forced vital capacity and (4) years of wheelchair dependency were assessed. All items of the EK scale were used except the one representing severe hypoventilation.
Regression analyses showed that the EK sum was the most significant explanatory variable (p<0.05) of all variables measured to explain muscle strength in both DMD and SMA subjects. The individual categories of EK (1–10) all contributed as significant explanatory variables (p<0.05) to the other variables measured.
The categories and items of the EK scale were relevant and valid as means of discriminating between levels of functional performance in the population studied which was evidence of content and construct validity. Copyright © 2001 Whurr Publishers Ltd.