Khalid A Alahmari1, Gregory F Marchetti2, Patrick J Sparto3, Joseph M Furman3, Susan L Whitney3. 1. Department of Physical Therapy, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA. Electronic address: alahmarika@gmail.com. 2. Department of Physical Therapy, Duquesne University, Pittsburgh, PA; Department of Otolaryngology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA. 3. Department of Physical Therapy, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA; Department of Otolaryngology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the psychometric properties (test-retest reliability, concurrent validity, construct validity) of the Balance Rehabilitation Unit (BRU) during testing of sensory integration processes in healthy adults and individuals with vestibular disorders. DESIGN: Experimental cross-sectional design. SETTING: Clinic. PARTICIPANTS: Participants (N=90) included 30 subjects with vestibular disorders (age range, 18-85y), 30 young healthy adults (age range, 18-50y), and 30 older healthy adults (age range, 60-85y). INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Participants were tested twice with the BRU and once with the SMART EquiTest Sensory Organization Test (SOT). The center of pressure (COP) in the anteroposterior direction (COPap) and the COP in the mediolateral direction (COPml) were recorded. The COPap and COPml time series were used to estimate the area and velocity of the COP. RESULTS: The intraclass correlation coefficient of the COP area and velocity measures for the BRU for all subjects was at least .76 in all sensory organization conditions (P<.001). Significant correlations were found between the BRU and the SOT, ranging from .64 to .81 for COP area and from .44 to .76 for COP velocity. The older control group had significantly greater COP area and velocity compared with younger controls for the BRU and the SOT. The COP (area, velocity) was significantly higher for the younger individuals in the vestibular group than the younger controls. CONCLUSIONS: The reliability and validity of COP measurements obtained during testing of the sensory integration processes were demonstrated using the BRU. Future work should examine the responsiveness of these measures when individuals with balance disorders participate in rehabilitation.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the psychometric properties (test-retest reliability, concurrent validity, construct validity) of the Balance Rehabilitation Unit (BRU) during testing of sensory integration processes in healthy adults and individuals with vestibular disorders. DESIGN: Experimental cross-sectional design. SETTING: Clinic. PARTICIPANTS: Participants (N=90) included 30 subjects with vestibular disorders (age range, 18-85y), 30 young healthy adults (age range, 18-50y), and 30 older healthy adults (age range, 60-85y). INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Participants were tested twice with the BRU and once with the SMART EquiTest Sensory Organization Test (SOT). The center of pressure (COP) in the anteroposterior direction (COPap) and the COP in the mediolateral direction (COPml) were recorded. The COPap and COPml time series were used to estimate the area and velocity of the COP. RESULTS: The intraclass correlation coefficient of the COP area and velocity measures for the BRU for all subjects was at least .76 in all sensory organization conditions (P<.001). Significant correlations were found between the BRU and the SOT, ranging from .64 to .81 for COP area and from .44 to .76 for COP velocity. The older control group had significantly greater COP area and velocity compared with younger controls for the BRU and the SOT. The COP (area, velocity) was significantly higher for the younger individuals in the vestibular group than the younger controls. CONCLUSIONS: The reliability and validity of COP measurements obtained during testing of the sensory integration processes were demonstrated using the BRU. Future work should examine the responsiveness of these measures when individuals with balance disorders participate in rehabilitation.
Keywords:
AP; BRU; Balance Rehabilitation Unit; COP; COP(ap); COP(ml); CTSIB; Clinical Test of Sensory Integration on Balance; HMD; ICC; MDC%; MDC(95); ML; Posture; Rehabilitation; SOT; Sensory Organization Test; anteroposterior; center of pressure; center of pressure in the anteroposterior direction; center of pressure in the mediolateral direction; head-mounted display; intraclass correlation coefficient; mediolateral; minimal detectable change at the 95% confidence level; minimal detectable change proportion
Authors: Diane M Wrisley; Marilee J Stephens; Shaun Mosley; Adam Wojnowski; Jordan Duffy; Robert Burkard Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: S L Whitney; J L Roche; G F Marchetti; C-C Lin; D P Steed; G R Furman; M C Musolino; M S Redfern Journal: Gait Posture Date: 2011-02-17 Impact factor: 2.840
Authors: Erin R Pletcher; Valerie J Williams; John P Abt; Paul M Morgan; Jeffrey J Parr; Meleesa F Wohleber; Mita Lovalekar; Timothy C Sell Journal: J Athl Train Date: 2017-01-31 Impact factor: 2.860
Authors: Guilherme Carlos Brech; Tatiana Godoy Bobbio; Kelem de Negreiros Cabral; Patrícia Mota Coutinho; Leila Regina de Castro; Luis Mochizuki; Jose Maria Soares-Junior; Edmund Chada Baracat; Luiz Eugênio Garcez Leme; Julia Maria D'Andréa Greve; Angélica Castilho Alonso Journal: Clinics (Sao Paulo) Date: 2022-05-10 Impact factor: 2.898
Authors: Randel L Swanson; Stephen Hampton; Judith Green-McKenzie; Ramon Diaz-Arrastia; M Sean Grady; Ragini Verma; Rosette Biester; Diana Duda; Ronald L Wolf; Douglas H Smith Journal: JAMA Date: 2018-03-20 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Ragini Verma; Randel L Swanson; Drew Parker; Abdol Aziz Ould Ismail; Russell T Shinohara; Jacob A Alappatt; Jimit Doshi; Christos Davatzikos; Michael Gallaway; Diana Duda; H Isaac Chen; Junghoon J Kim; Ruben C Gur; Ronald L Wolf; M Sean Grady; Stephen Hampton; Ramon Diaz-Arrastia; Douglas H Smith Journal: JAMA Date: 2019-07-23 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Faisal Karmali; Adam D Goodworth; Yulia Valko; Tania Leeder; Robert J Peterka; Daniel M Merfeld Journal: J Neurophysiol Date: 2021-01-27 Impact factor: 2.714