Skip to main content
PMC home page
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases logoLink to Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases
. 1993 Dec;52(12):886–890. doi: 10.1136/ard.52.12.886

The GALS locomotor screen and disability.

M J Plant 1, S Linton 1, E Dodd 1, P W Jones 1, P T Dawes 1
PMCID: PMC1005221  PMID: 8311541

Abstract

OBJECTIVES--Examination of the locomotor system is frequently neglected. Therefore, the GALS locomotor screen (Gait, Arms, Legs, Spine) has been proposed by Doherty et al as a practical method of identifying functionally important problems. This study was designed to test whether this screen reflects functional impairment, as measured by accepted health status measures. METHODS--Two observers performed the GALS screen in a total of 83 patients with a variety of musculoskeletal conditions. The examination components of GALS were rated by a simple 0 to 3 scale. Physical ability was further assessed by Health Activity Questionnaire (HAQ), Barthel index and Steinbrocker's ARA classification. RESULTS--For the total patient group, Spearman correlations between GALS and the three functional indices were good (r = 0.62 to 0.71, p < 0.001). Correlations were equally good for rheumatoid arthritis patients alone (r = 0.65 to 0.70, p < 0.001), but less good although still significant for the other miscellaneous rheumatic conditions (r = 0.31 to 0.46, p < 0.05). Observed proportional agreement between the two observers for the individual scores was > 70%, with a kappa statistic k = 0.49 to 0.74. CONCLUSIONS--The GALS screen is a reliable and valid measure of functional ability, compared with standard accepted indices in a variety of musculoskeletal diseases. This supports the proposal for its use as a screening test by general practitioners and medical students.

Full text

PDF
886

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Bombardier C., Ware J., Russell I. J., Larson M., Chalmers A., Read J. L. Auranofin therapy and quality of life in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Results of a multicenter trial. Am J Med. 1986 Oct;81(4):565–578. doi: 10.1016/0002-9343(86)90539-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Brennan P., Silman A. Statistical methods for assessing observer variability in clinical measures. BMJ. 1992 Jun 6;304(6840):1491–1494. doi: 10.1136/bmj.304.6840.1491. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Collin C., Wade D. T., Davies S., Horne V. The Barthel ADL Index: a reliability study. Int Disabil Stud. 1988;10(2):61–63. doi: 10.3109/09638288809164103. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Doherty M., Abawi J., Pattrick M. Audit of medical inpatient examination: a cry from the joint. J R Coll Physicians Lond. 1990 Apr;24(2):115–118. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Doherty M., Dacre J., Dieppe P., Snaith M. The 'GALS' locomotor screen. Ann Rheum Dis. 1992 Oct;51(10):1165–1169. doi: 10.1136/ard.51.10.1165. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Fitzpatrick R., Newman S., Lamb R., Shipley M. A comparison of measures of health status in rheumatoid arthritis. Br J Rheumatol. 1989 Jun;28(3):201–206. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/28.3.201. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Fries J. F., Spitz P., Kraines R. G., Holman H. R. Measurement of patient outcome in arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 1980 Feb;23(2):137–145. doi: 10.1002/art.1780230202. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Hochberg M. C., Chang R. W., Dwosh I., Lindsey S., Pincus T., Wolfe F. The American College of Rheumatology 1991 revised criteria for the classification of global functional status in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 1992 May;35(5):498–502. doi: 10.1002/art.1780350502. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Jones A., Ledingham J., Regan M., Doherty M. A proposed minimal rheumatological screening history and examination. The joint answers back. J R Coll Physicians Lond. 1991 Apr;25(2):111–115. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Kirwan J. R., Reeback J. S. Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire modified to assess disability in British patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Br J Rheumatol. 1986 May;25(2):206–209. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/25.2.206. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Liang M. H., Larson M. G., Cullen K. E., Schwartz J. A. Comparative measurement efficiency and sensitivity of five health status instruments for arthritis research. Arthritis Rheum. 1985 May;28(5):542–547. doi: 10.1002/art.1780280513. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Lorig K., Lubeck D., Kraines R. G., Seleznick M., Holman H. R. Outcomes of self-help education for patients with arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 1985 Jun;28(6):680–685. doi: 10.1002/art.1780280612. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Spencer M. A., Dixon A. S. Rheumatological features of patients admitted as emergencies to acute general medical wards. Rheumatol Rehabil. 1981 May;20(2):71–73. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/20.2.71. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Thompson P. W. Functional outcome in rheumatoid arthritis. Br J Rheumatol. 1988;27 (Suppl 1):37–43. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Wade D. T., Collin C. The Barthel ADL Index: a standard measure of physical disability? Int Disabil Stud. 1988;10(2):64–67. doi: 10.3109/09638288809164105. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Wolfe F., Kleinheksel S. M., Cathey M. A., Hawley D. J., Spitz P. W., Fries J. F. The clinical value of the Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire Functional Disability Index in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol. 1988 Oct;15(10):1480–1488. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Yelin E., Henke C., Epstein W. The work dynamics of the person with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 1987 May;30(5):507–512. doi: 10.1002/art.1780300504. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES