0% found this document useful (0 votes)
724 views4 pages

Scala Wisconsin

(1) The Wisconsin Gait Scale (WGS) evaluates gait problems in patients with hemiplegia following stroke using 14 submeasures that observe walking from different angles and aspects of gait like stance phase, toe off, and swing phase of the affected leg. (2) Each submeasure is scored from 1 to 5, with higher numbers indicating more impairment. The total score is calculated using a formula and ranges from 13.35 to 42, with higher scores signifying more serious gait abnormalities. (3) The WGS was developed by researchers at the University of Wisconsin to monitor the effectiveness of rehabilitation training for stroke patients.

Uploaded by

Florin Marinescu
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
724 views4 pages

Scala Wisconsin

(1) The Wisconsin Gait Scale (WGS) evaluates gait problems in patients with hemiplegia following stroke using 14 submeasures that observe walking from different angles and aspects of gait like stance phase, toe off, and swing phase of the affected leg. (2) Each submeasure is scored from 1 to 5, with higher numbers indicating more impairment. The total score is calculated using a formula and ranges from 13.35 to 42, with higher scores signifying more serious gait abnormalities. (3) The WGS was developed by researchers at the University of Wisconsin to monitor the effectiveness of rehabilitation training for stroke patients.

Uploaded by

Florin Marinescu
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

Wisconsin Gait Scale (WGS)

Overview: The Wisconsin Gait Scale (WGS) can be used to evaluate the gait problems experienced by a
patient with hemiplegia following stroke. This can be used to monitor the effectiveness of rehabilitation
training. The authors are from the University of Wisconin.

Observations of the subject:

(1) walking towards the observer

(2) walking away from the observer

(3) from the side

Measures (14 submeasures):

(1) stance phase of the affected leg (5 submeasures)

(2) toe off of the affected leg (2 submeasures)

(3) swing phase of the affected leg (6 submeasures)

(4) heel strike of the affected leg (1 submeasure)

Stance phase submeasures:

(1) use of hand held gait aid

(2) stance time on impaired side

(3) step length of the unaffected side

(4) weight shift to the affected side with or without a gait aid

(5) stance width (measure distance between feet prior to toe off of affected foot)

Toe off submeasures:

(6) guardedness (pause prior to advancing affected leg)

(7) hip extension of affected side (observe gluteal creases from behind the subject)

Swing phase submeasures:

(8) external rotation during intial swing

(9) circumduction at mid swing (observe path of affected heel)

(10) hip hiking at mid swing

(11) knee flexion from toe off to mid swing

(12) toe clearance

(13) pelvis rotation


Heel strike affected leg submeasure:

(14) initial foot contact

Submeasure Finding Points

use of hand held gait aid no gait aid 1

minimal gait aid use 2

minimal gait aid use wide base 3

marked use 4

marked use wide base 5

stance time on impaired side equal (time spent on affected side same as 1
time spent on unaffected side during single
leg stance)

unequal 2

ver brief 3

step length of unaffected step through (heel of unaffected foot clearly 1


side advances beyond the toe of the affected foot)

foot does not clear 2

step to (unaffected foot placed behind or up 3


to affected foot but not beyond)

weight shift to the affected full shift (head and trunk shift laterally over 1
side (with or without gait aid) the affected foot during the single stance)

decreased shift 2

very limited shift 3

stance width normal (up to 1 shoe width between feet) 1

moderate (up to 2 shoe widths) 2

wide (more than 2 shoe widths) 3

guardedness none (good forward movement with no 1


hesitancy noted)

slight 2

marked hesitation 3

hip extension of affected side equal extension (hips equally extend during 1
push off; maintains erect posture during toe
off)
slight flexion 2

marked extension 3

external rotation during intiial same as unimpaired leg 1


swing

increased rotation 2

marked 3

circumduction at mid swing none (affected foot adducts no more than 1


unaffected foot during swing)

moderate 2

marked 3

hip hiking at mid swing none (pelvis slightly dips during swing) 1

elevation 2

vaults 3

knee flexion from toe off to normal (affected knee flexes equally to 1
mid swing unaffected side)

some 2

minimal 3

none 4

toe clearance normal (toe clears floor throughout swing) 1

slight drag 2

marked 3

pelvic rotation at terminal forward (pelvis rotated forward to prepare for 1


swing heel strike)

neutral 2

retracted 3

initial foot contact heel strike (heel makes the initial contact with 1
the floor)

foot flat 2

no contact of heel 3

total score = SUM(points for 2 to 10 12 to 14) + (3/5 * (points for 1)) + (3/4 * (points for 11))
Interpretation:

• minimum score: 13.35

• maximum score: 42

• The higher the score the more seriously affected the gait.

References:

Rodriquez AA Black PO et al. Gait training efficacy using a home-based practice model in chronic
hemiplegia. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1996; 77: 801-805. (Table 1 page 803).

You might also like