ClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT04117997Updated Apr 2, 2025

Validation Fugl-Meyer in Italian Language (FMI)

An observational study in Validation Fugl-Meyer Scale in Italian, sponsored by Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi Onlus. Recruiting at 1 site in Italy. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 90 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-04-02.

Sponsored by Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi Onlus · Observational

From the registry’s dates

  • Primary completion was expected by May 2025, 1 year 6 months ago, but the record still lists the study as recruiting.
  • Started Nov 2022; still recruiting 4 years later.
Study type
Observational
Model
Case-only
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
70
Ages
18 Years to 90 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The aim of the study is to perform a cultural validation of the Italian translation of the Fugl-Meyer Assessment scale for the upper and the lower limb on a group of post-stroke patients admitted to the neurological department at The Don Carlo Foundation.

The purpose is to validate the Italian translation of the Fugl-Meyer Assessment scale in order to allow immediate clinical use.

Read the detailed description

The Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) is one of the most used and recommended assessment scales of sensorimotor function in stroke. It was introduced for the first time by Axl Fugl-Meyer and collaborators and originally published in both English and Swedish, representing the first quantitative assessment tool for the hemiplegic patient.

The FMA is a valid, reliable, responsive and most widely used standardized clinical scale for the evaluation of the degree of sensory and motor impairment of the hemiplegic patient, and to date is considered one of the most used tools worldwide. Extensive research has shown that FMA is easy to use and does not require special equipment, making it particularly suitable for different types of clinical setting around the world.

There are many currently translation and cultural validation studies of the FMA in several languages (Danish, Norwegian, Spanish, French), but an official version validated in Italian is no available to date.

This study aims to perform and develop a transcultural validation of the FMA for the upper and the lower limbs in Italian, following a methodological approach, already validated, for the process of translation and cultural adaptation, including formal involvement of the University of Gothenburg, which holds the rights on the original scale.

The translated version in Italian is tested by 3 physiotherapists admitted to the neurological department at The Don Carlo Foundation, in order to identify lingual and conceptual inconsistencies that could influence the score, the understanding, the interpretation and the cultural equivalence of the scale.

02

Conditions studied

  • Validation Fugl-Meyer Scale in Italian
03

In context

Lead sponsor

Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi Onlus is the lead sponsor of 146 studies on the registry; 37 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 90 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

70 individuals with stroke consecutively admitted to the neurological department at The Don Carlo Foundation, 4-9 days post-stroke. The patients will be aged between 18-90 years old.

Eligibility criteria

Inclusion Criteria: 70 individuals with first-ever stroke will be enrolled. Eligible subjects will be in-patients with an acute event occurred no later than 15 days from admission at the "neurological department " at the Don Carlo Gnocchi Foundation.

Exclusion Criteria:

Visual and/ or hearing deficits, amputation of the upper or lower limb, cerebellar stroke; previous strokes (relapse), cognitive decline (\<21).

Terms in these criteria, in plain language(1)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

MMSE and MoCA

Short tests of memory and thinking, each scored out of 30. Lower scores suggest more difficulty; criteria give a range, either to include people with memory problems or to leave them out.

05

Study design

Observational model
Case-only
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
70 participants (estimated)
Patient registry
No
06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Fugl-Meyer Assessment

    sensory and motor recovery assessment after stroke, total score from 0 to 64, subscore upper limb 36, lower limb 28. Higher scores represent better outcomes

    Time frame: 1 day

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Fugl-Meyer AR, Jaasko L, Leyman I, Olsson S, Steglind S. The post-stroke hemiplegic patient. 1. a method for evaluation of physical performance. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1975;7(1):13-31. PubMed 1135616 ↗
  • Barbosa NE, Forero SM, Galeano CP, Hernandez ED, Landinez NS, Sunnerhagen KS, Alt Murphy M. Translation and cultural validation of clinical observational scales - the Fugl-Meyer assessment for post stroke sensorimotor function in Colombian Spanish. Disabil Rehabil. 2019 Sep;41(19):2317-2323. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2018.1464604. Epub 2018 Apr 24. PubMed 29688080 ↗
  • Lundquist CB, Maribo T. The Fugl-Meyer assessment of the upper extremity: reliability, responsiveness and validity of the Danish version. Disabil Rehabil. 2017 May;39(9):934-939. doi: 10.3109/09638288.2016.1163422. Epub 2016 Apr 10. PubMed 27062881 ↗
  • Santisteban L, Teremetz M, Bleton JP, Baron JC, Maier MA, Lindberg PG. Upper Limb Outcome Measures Used in Stroke Rehabilitation Studies: A Systematic Literature Review. PLoS One. 2016 May 6;11(5):e0154792. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0154792. eCollection 2016. PubMed 27152853 ↗
  • Wild D, Grove A, Martin M, Eremenco S, McElroy S, Verjee-Lorenz A, Erikson P; ISPOR Task Force for Translation and Cultural Adaptation. Principles of Good Practice for the Translation and Cultural Adaptation Process for Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Measures: report of the ISPOR Task Force for Translation and Cultural Adaptation. Value Health. 2005 Mar-Apr;8(2):94-104. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.04054.x. PubMed 15804318 ↗
  • Sousa VD, Rojjanasrirat W. Translation, adaptation and validation of instruments or scales for use in cross-cultural health care research: a clear and user-friendly guideline. J Eval Clin Pract. 2011 Apr;17(2):268-74. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01434.x. Epub 2010 Sep 28. PubMed 20874835 ↗
  • Schuster C, Hahn S, Ettlin T. Objectively-assessed outcome measures: a translation and cross-cultural adaptation procedure applied to the Chedoke McMaster Arm and Hand Activity Inventory (CAHAI). BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010 Nov 29;10:106. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-10-106. PubMed 21114807 ↗
  • Michaelsen SM, Rocha AS, Knabben RJ, Rodrigues LP, Fernandes CG. Translation, adaptation and inter-rater reliability of the administration manual for the Fugl-Meyer assessment. Rev Bras Fisioter. 2011 Jan-Feb;15(1):80-8. PubMed 21519719 ↗
  • See J, Dodakian L, Chou C, Chan V, McKenzie A, Reinkensmeyer DJ, Cramer SC. A standardized approach to the Fugl-Meyer assessment and its implications for clinical trials. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2013 Oct;27(8):732-41. doi: 10.1177/1545968313491000. Epub 2013 Jun 17. PubMed 23774125 ↗
  • Sanchez R, Echeverry J. [Validating scales used for measuring factors in medicine]. Rev Salud Publica (Bogota). 2004 Sep-Dec;6(3):302-18. Spanish. PubMed 15656069 ↗
  • Svensson E. Different ranking approaches defining association and agreement measures of paired ordinal data. Stat Med. 2012 Nov 20;31(26):3104-17. doi: 10.1002/sim.5382. Epub 2012 Jun 19. PubMed 22714677 ↗
  • Cohen J. Weighted kappa: nominal scale agreement with provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. Psychol Bull. 1968 Oct;70(4):213-20. doi: 10.1037/h0026256. No abstract available. PubMed 19673146 ↗
  • Kazdin AE. Artifact, bias, and complexity of assessment: the ABCs of reliability. J Appl Behav Anal. 1977 Spring;10(1):141-50. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1977.10-141. PubMed 16795543 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No — We haven't plan to share data.

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reached

Started Nov 2022 (actual). Primary completion is estimated for May 2025, 30 months after the start.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Oct 4, 2019
First posted
Oct 7, 2019
StartActual
Nov 1, 2022
Primary completionEst.
May 1, 2025
CompletionEst.
Dec 1, 2025
Last update
Apr 2, 2025
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Apr 2, 2025, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT04117997
Responsible party
Francesca Cecchi (Dr. Francesca Cecchi, Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi Onlus) — Principal investigator
First posted
Oct 7, 2019
Start date
Nov 1, 2022
Primary completion
May 1, 2025 (estimated)
Completion
Dec 1, 2025 (estimated)
Last update
Apr 2, 2025

Study contacts

Francesca Cecchi, MD
Contact
fcecchi@dongnocchi.it
05573931

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion