BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: In any given year, 28% to 35% of older adults experience falls. In nursing home environments, the annual rate of falls increases to 30% to 50%. Our objective was to verify and compare the reliability, validity, and ability to identify falls of the Berg Balance Scale (BBS), Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest), Mini-BESTest, and Brief-BESTest for older adults who live in nursing homes. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study. Older adults (n = 49; aged 62-90 years; mean = 77.8; standard deviation = 7.2) were recruited from a nonprofit nursing home. All participants were assessed by 2 physiotherapists using the BBS, BESTest, Mini-BESTest, and Brief-BESTest. The interrater and test-retest (7-14 days) reliability were assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs [2, 1]). Minimal detectable changes at the 95% confidence level were established. To analyze each test's ability to identify fall status, we used receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, whose statistical significance we verified using the area under the ROC curve (AUC) and respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The diagnostic likelihood ratios (positive and negative) and 95% CI were used to verify posttest probability. We used Fagan's nomogram to show the posttest probability of each balance test. Validity was assessed using kappa coefficients and the prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted kappa (PABAK). RESULTS: Interrater and test-retest reliability for the total scores were good to excellent across all 4 tests (ICC interrater value = 0.992-0.994 and ICC test-retest value = 0.886-0.945). All tests were also able to identify fall status (AUC = 0.712-0.762) and were in good agreement with each other (kappa coefficient for individuals with fall risk = 0.679-0.957 and individuals with no fall risk = 0.135-0.143; PABAK = 83.7%-98%). CONCLUSION: All balance tests presented similar reliability, reproducibility, and validity. This suggests that any of these tests can be used in clinical practice. However, the Brief-BESTest is the quickest and easiest test to perform.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: In any given year, 28% to 35% of older adults experience falls. In nursing home environments, the annual rate of falls increases to 30% to 50%. Our objective was to verify and compare the reliability, validity, and ability to identify falls of the Berg Balance Scale (BBS), Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest), Mini-BESTest, and Brief-BESTest for older adults who live in nursing homes. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study. Older adults (n = 49; aged 62-90 years; mean = 77.8; standard deviation = 7.2) were recruited from a nonprofit nursing home. All participants were assessed by 2 physiotherapists using the BBS, BESTest, Mini-BESTest, and Brief-BESTest. The interrater and test-retest (7-14 days) reliability were assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs [2, 1]). Minimal detectable changes at the 95% confidence level were established. To analyze each test's ability to identify fall status, we used receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, whose statistical significance we verified using the area under the ROC curve (AUC) and respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The diagnostic likelihood ratios (positive and negative) and 95% CI were used to verify posttest probability. We used Fagan's nomogram to show the posttest probability of each balance test. Validity was assessed using kappa coefficients and the prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted kappa (PABAK). RESULTS: Interrater and test-retest reliability for the total scores were good to excellent across all 4 tests (ICC interrater value = 0.992-0.994 and ICC test-retest value = 0.886-0.945). All tests were also able to identify fall status (AUC = 0.712-0.762) and were in good agreement with each other (kappa coefficient for individuals with fall risk = 0.679-0.957 and individuals with no fall risk = 0.135-0.143; PABAK = 83.7%-98%). CONCLUSION: All balance tests presented similar reliability, reproducibility, and validity. This suggests that any of these tests can be used in clinical practice. However, the Brief-BESTest is the quickest and easiest test to perform.
Authors: Luis Galhardas; Armando Raimundo; Jesús Del Pozo-Cruz; José Marmeleira Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-04-21 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Sitt Nyein Phyu; Punnee Peungsuwan; Rungthip Puntumetakul; Uraiwan Chatchawan Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-06-06 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Rafael Lomas-Vega; Daniel Rodríguez-Almagro; Ana Belén Peinado-Rubia; Noelia Zagalaz-Anula; Francisco Molina; Esteban Obrero-Gaitán; Alfonso Javier Ibáñez-Vera; María Catalina Osuna-Pérez Journal: Diagnostics (Basel) Date: 2020-12-06
Authors: Cristina García-Muñoz; María Jesús Casuso-Holgado; Juan Carlos Hernández-Rodríguez; Elena Pinero-Pinto; Rocío Palomo-Carrión; María-Dolores Cortés-Vega Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-11-22 Impact factor: 2.692