BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: This study compared the psychometric properties of 3 clinical balance measures, the Berg Balance Scale (BBS), the Balance subscale of the Fugl-Meyer test (FM-B), and the Postural Assessment Scale for Stroke Patients (PASS), in stroke patients with a broad range of neurological and functional impairment from the acute stage up to 180 days after onset. METHODS: One hundred twenty-three stroke patients were followed up prospectively with the 3 balance measures 14, 30, 90, and 180 days after stroke onset (DAS). Reliability (interrater reliability and internal consistency) and validity (concurrent validity, convergent validity, and predictive validity) of each measure were examined. A comparison of the responsiveness of each of the 3 measures was made on the basis of the entire group of patients and 3 separate groups classified by degree of neurological severity. RESULTS: The FM-B and BBS showed a significant floor or ceiling effect at some DAS points, whereas the PASS did not show these effects. The BBS, FM-B, and PASS all had good reliability and validity for patients at different recovery stages after stroke. The results of effect size demonstrated fair to good responsiveness of all 3 measures within the first 90 DAS but, as expected, only a low level of responsiveness at 90 to 180 DAS. The PASS was more responsive to changes in severe stroke patients at the earliest period after stroke onset, 14 to 30 DAS. CONCLUSIONS: All 3 measures tested showed very acceptable levels of reliability, validity, and responsiveness for both clinicians and researchers. The PASS showed slightly better psychometric characteristics than the other 2 measures.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: This study compared the psychometric properties of 3 clinical balance measures, the Berg Balance Scale (BBS), the Balance subscale of the Fugl-Meyer test (FM-B), and the Postural Assessment Scale for StrokePatients (PASS), in strokepatients with a broad range of neurological and functional impairment from the acute stage up to 180 days after onset. METHODS: One hundred twenty-three strokepatients were followed up prospectively with the 3 balance measures 14, 30, 90, and 180 days after stroke onset (DAS). Reliability (interrater reliability and internal consistency) and validity (concurrent validity, convergent validity, and predictive validity) of each measure were examined. A comparison of the responsiveness of each of the 3 measures was made on the basis of the entire group of patients and 3 separate groups classified by degree of neurological severity. RESULTS: The FM-B and BBS showed a significant floor or ceiling effect at some DAS points, whereas the PASS did not show these effects. The BBS, FM-B, and PASS all had good reliability and validity for patients at different recovery stages after stroke. The results of effect size demonstrated fair to good responsiveness of all 3 measures within the first 90 DAS but, as expected, only a low level of responsiveness at 90 to 180 DAS. The PASS was more responsive to changes in severe strokepatients at the earliest period after stroke onset, 14 to 30 DAS. CONCLUSIONS: All 3 measures tested showed very acceptable levels of reliability, validity, and responsiveness for both clinicians and researchers. The PASS showed slightly better psychometric characteristics than the other 2 measures.
Authors: Arlene A Schmid; Sarah E Arnold; Valerie A Jones; M Jane Ritter; Stephanie A Sapp; Marieke Van Puymbroeck Journal: Am J Occup Ther Date: 2015 May-Jun
Authors: Jau-Hong Lin; Wen-Chung Wang; Ching-Fan Sheu; Sing Kai Lo; I-Ping Hsueh; Ching-Lin Hsieh Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Predrag R Bozic; Ozgur Celik; Mehmet Uygur; Christopher A Knight; Slobodan Jaric Journal: J Strength Cond Res Date: 2013-06 Impact factor: 3.775
Authors: Olivier D R van Wulfften Palthe; Stein J Janssen; Jay S Wunder; Peter C Ferguson; Guo Wei; Peter S Rose; Micheal J Yaszemski; Franklin H Sim; Patrick J Boland; John H Healey; Francis J Hornicek; Joseph H Schwab Journal: Spine J Date: 2016-11-14 Impact factor: 4.166
Authors: Jennifer L Moore; Kirsten Potter; Kathleen Blankshain; Sandra L Kaplan; Linda C OʼDwyer; Jane E Sullivan Journal: J Neurol Phys Ther Date: 2018-07 Impact factor: 3.649
Authors: Monica Spruit-van Eijk; Bianca I Buijck; Sytse U Zuidema; Frans L M Voncken; Alexander C H Geurts; Raymond T C M Koopmans Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2010-03-27 Impact factor: 3.921
Authors: Jennifer Wu; Lucy Dodakian; Jill See; Erin Burke Quinlan; Lisa Meng; Jeby Abraham; Ellen C Wong; Vu Le; Alison McKenzie; Steven C Cramer Journal: Neurorehabil Neural Repair Date: 2020-10-21 Impact factor: 3.919