German translation and psychometric properties of the modified Gait Efficacy Scale (mGES)

  • Dorothee Altmeier
  • Eleftheria GiannouliEmail author
Original Contribution



Perceived self-efficacy to complete a task affects function and behavior. The modified Gait Efficacy Scale (mGES) is a 10-item self-report questionnaire to assess confidence in walking under various circumstances.


The aim of this study was to adapt the mGES to a German version (mGES-D) and test its psychometric properties.

Material and methods

The final sample used for analysis consisted of 140 community-dwelling older adults with a mean age of 71 ± 6 years and 61% were female. Construct validity of the questionnaire was tested with Cronbach’s alpha. The test-retest reliability was calculated in a subsample of 31 after a 4–5 week period (33.4 ± 11 days). To test the validity three other mobility-related self-efficacy scales (Activities-Specific Balance Confidence, Falls Efficacy scale and the Stair Self-Efficacy questionnaire) as well as two performance-based measures (gait speed and the Four Square Step test) were used.


Both the internal consistency (T1 = 0.934, T2 = 0.958) as well as the test-retest reliability (0.932) were acceptable. Correlations between the mGES-D and the rest of the German mobility-related self-efficacy scales were above 0.758 and the performance-based mobility measures above 0.316.


The mGES-D is a reliable and valid measure of walking confidence among healthy, community-dwelling older adults. Further application and testing of the mGES-D in primary care and clinical studies are needed to consolidate the findings.


Walking confidence Older adults Falls prevention Gait disorders Geriatric assessment 

Deutsche Übersetzung und psychometrische Eigenschaften der modifizierten Gait Efficacy Scale (mGES)



Das Gefühl, einer Aufgabe gewachsen zu sein, beeinflusst unsere Leistungsfähigkeit und unser Handeln. Mit der modifizierten Gait Efficacy Scale (mGES) wird mittels 10 Items die Selbstwirksamkeitserwartung in verschiedenen Gangsituationen abgefragt.


Ziel dieser Studie ist die Anpassung des mGES auf eine deutsche Version (mGES-D) und die Untersuchung der psychometrischen Eigenschaften.

Material und Methoden

Die verwendete Stichprobe umfasst 140 eigenständig lebende Senioren mit einem durchschnittlichen Alter von 71 ± 6 Jahren, 61 % davon weiblich. Die Konstruktvalidität des Fragebogens wurde mittels Cronbachs Alpha berechnet. Zur Überprüfung der Test-Retest-Reliabilität wurde die Testung bei einer Stichprobengröße von n = 31 nach 4 bis 5 Wochen (33,4 ± 11 Tage) wiederholt. Die Validität wurde mittels des Vergleichs mit drei anderen Selbstwirksamkeits-Fragebögen (Activities-specific Balance Confidence, Falls Efficacy Scale und Stair Self-Efficacy Questionnaire) und zwei körperlichen Tests (Ganggeschwindigkeit und Four-Square-Step-Test) überprüft.


Die Ergebnisse der internen Konsistenz (T1 = 0,934, T2 = 0,958) und Test-Retest-Reliabilität (0,932) sind akzeptabel. Die Korrelationen zwischen dem mGES-D und den erhobenen Selbstwirksamkeits-Fragebögen lagen über 0,758 und den körperlichen Tests über 0,316.


Der mGES-D ist ein reliables und valides Messinstrument zur Erfassung der gangspezifischen Selbstwirksamkeit bei gesunden älteren Menschen. Eine weitere Anwendung und Erprobung des mGES-D in der Primärversorgung und in klinischen Studien ist nötig, um die Ergebnisse dieser Studie zu konsolidieren.


Gang-Selbstwirksamkeit Ältere Menschen Sturzprophylaxe Gangstörungen Geriatrische Messverfahren 


Compliance with ethical guidelines

Conflict of interest

D. Altmeier and E. Giannouli declare that they have no competing interests.

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Ethics Committee of the German Sport University Cologne (reference number: 187/2017) and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Informed consent was obtained from all patients included in the study.

Supplementary material

391_2019_1507_MOESM1_ESM.docx (15 kb)
Supplementary Table: Items comprising the German version of the mGES (mGES-D)


  1. 1.
    Altmeier D, Kempe M, Memmert D (2018) Stair self-efficacy questionnaire to test the ability of stair negotiation for older people. Ger J Exerc Sport Res 48:40. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Asano M, Miller WC, Eng JJ (2007) Development and psychometric properties of the ambulatory self-confidence questionnaire. Gerontology 53(6):373–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bandura A (1997) Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. W.H. Freeman, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bandura A (2006) Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. In: Pajares F, Urdan T (eds) Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents, vol 5, pp 307–337. Information Age Publishing, Greenwich, CTGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brislin RW (1970) Back-translation for cross-cultural research. J Cross Cult Psychol 1(3):185–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dias N, Kempen GI, Todd CJ, Beyer N, Freiberger E, Piot-Ziegler C, Yardley L, Hauer K (2006) Die Deutsche Version der Falls Efficacy Scale-International Version (FES-I). Z Gerontol Geriatr 39(4):297–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dite W, Temple VA (2002) A clinical test of stepping and change of direction to identify multiple falling older adults. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 83(11):1566–1571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fritz S, Lusardi M (2009) White paper: “walking speed: the sixth vital sign”. J Geriatr Phys Ther 32(2):2–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Goldberg A, Talley SA, Adamo DE (2016) Construct validity of the Modified Gait Efficacy Scale in older females. Physiother Theory Pract 32(4):307–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hamel KA, Cavanagh PR (2004) Stair performance in people aged 75 and older. J Am Geriatr Soc 52(4):563–567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hirvensalo M, Rantanen T, Heikkinen E (2000) Mobility difficulties and physical activity as predictors of mortality and loss of independence in the community-living older population. J Am Geriatr Soc 48(5):493–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    McAuley E, Mihalko SL, Rosengren K (1997) Self-efficacy and balance correlates of fear of falling in the elderly. J Aging Phys Act 5(4):329–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Newell AM, VanSwearingen JM, Hile E, Brach JS (2012) The modified gait efficacy scale: establishing the psychometric properties in older adults. Phys Ther 92(2):318–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Powell LE, Myers AM (1995) The Activities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 50A(1):M28–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schott N (2008) Deutsche Adaptation der „Activities-Specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale“ zur Erfassung der sturzassoziierten Selbstwirksamkeit. Z Gerontol Geriatr 41(6):475–485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sugovic M, Witt JK (2013) An older view on distance perception: older adults perceive walkable extents as farther. Exp Brain Res 226(3):383–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yardley L, Beyer N, Hauer K, Kempen G, Piot-Ziegler C, Todd C (2005) Development and initial validation of the Falls Efficacy Scale-International (FES-I). Age Ageing 34(6):614–619CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Medizin Verlag GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Movement and Sport GerontologyGerman Sport University CologneCologneGermany

Personalised recommendations