N Löfgren1, M Benka Wallén1, K Sorjonen2, D Conradsson1,3, E Franzén1,3. 1. Division of Physiotherapy, Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. 2. Division of Psychology, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. 3. Functional Area Occupational Therapy & Physiotherapy, Allied Health Professionals Function, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The Mini-BESTest consists of items relevant to balance deficiencies among people with Parkinson's disease (PwPD). However, the Mini-BESTest's construct validity has been sparsely evaluated in this population. We therefore aimed to investigate the hypotheses that the Mini-BESTest results would be worse among: (i) PwPD compared to healthy controls; (ii) PwPD with moderate compared to mild motor severity; (iii) PwPD with a history of recurrent compared to non-recurrent falls. Moreover, the relationship between the Mini-BESTest and tests of similar and different constructs was expected to be moderate to strong and poor, respectively. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred and five PwPD with mild-to-moderate motor severity and 47 healthy controls were included. PwPD were divided into subgroups based on motor severity and fall history. Main outcome measures were the Mini-BESTest, the timed up and go (TUG), and the original Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale, part II (Activities of Daily Living). Independent t-tests and Spearman's rho were used for the analyses. RESULTS: The Mini-BESTest results were worse among PwPD compared to controls (P<.001), and among people with moderate motor severity compared to those with mild severity (P<.001). However, no differences were found between recurrent and non-recurrent fallers (P=.096). Spearman's rho showed moderate (ρ=-.470) and poor correlations (ρ=-.211) for convergent (TUG) and divergent validity (UPDRS, part II), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the Mini-BESTest appears to adequately measure dynamic balance among PwPD with mild-to-moderate severity, although it was unable to distinguish between recurrent and non-recurrent fallers.
OBJECTIVES: The Mini-BESTest consists of items relevant to balance deficiencies among people with Parkinson's disease (PwPD). However, the Mini-BESTest's construct validity has been sparsely evaluated in this population. We therefore aimed to investigate the hypotheses that the Mini-BESTest results would be worse among: (i) PwPD compared to healthy controls; (ii) PwPD with moderate compared to mild motor severity; (iii) PwPD with a history of recurrent compared to non-recurrent falls. Moreover, the relationship between the Mini-BESTest and tests of similar and different constructs was expected to be moderate to strong and poor, respectively. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred and five PwPD with mild-to-moderate motor severity and 47 healthy controls were included. PwPD were divided into subgroups based on motor severity and fall history. Main outcome measures were the Mini-BESTest, the timed up and go (TUG), and the original Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale, part II (Activities of Daily Living). Independent t-tests and Spearman's rho were used for the analyses. RESULTS: The Mini-BESTest results were worse among PwPD compared to controls (P<.001), and among people with moderate motor severity compared to those with mild severity (P<.001). However, no differences were found between recurrent and non-recurrent fallers (P=.096). Spearman's rho showed moderate (ρ=-.470) and poor correlations (ρ=-.211) for convergent (TUG) and divergent validity (UPDRS, part II), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the Mini-BESTest appears to adequately measure dynamic balance among PwPD with mild-to-moderate severity, although it was unable to distinguish between recurrent and non-recurrent fallers.
Authors: Danielle Pessoa Lima; Samuel Brito de Almeida; Janine de Carvalho Bonfadini; Emmanuelle Silva Tavares Sobreira; Patrícia Gomes Damasceno; Antonio Brazil Viana Júnior; Madeleine Sales de Alencar; João Rafael Gomes de Luna; Pedro Gustavo Barros Rodrigues; Isabelle de Sousa Pereira; André Luis de Castro Gadelha; Liliane Maria de Oliveira; Érica Carneiro Barbosa Chaves; Vlademir Gomes Carneiro; Rayane Rodrigues Monteiro; Thatyara Almeida de Macedo Costa; Lucas Helal; Joseph Signorile; Lidiane Andréa Oliveira Lima; Manoel Alves Sobreira-Neto; Pedro Braga-Neto Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2020-10-12 Impact factor: 2.692