BACKGROUND: Previous researchers have suggested that balance control deficits are detected more accurately with dual-task testing than single-task testing. However, it is necessary to examine the clinimetric properties of dual-task testing before employing it in clinical and research settings. OBJECTIVE: To examine and compare the relative and absolute reliability of the Balance Error Scoring System (BESS), Tandem Gait Test (TGT), and Clinical Reaction Time (CRT) under single and dual-task conditions in uninjured active youth and young adults.Study Design: Single-group, repeated-measures study. METHODS: Twenty-three individuals [9 female; median age 17 years] completed three trials of the BESS, TGT, and CRT under single and dual-task testing conditions during testing session one. Two raters assessed participants to assess inter-rater reliability. Either later on the same day or the following day, the protocol was repeated by one rater to assess intra-rater reliability. The average of three trials was used to calculate intra-rater (between-session) and inter-rater (within-session) intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM), minimal detectable change (MDC), and Cohen's Kappa coefficient for tests as appropriate under both conditions. Bland-Altman plots (mean difference and 95% limits of agreement) were used to assess for a systematic error associated with a learning effect. RESULTS: Only one participant attended the second session on the following day, while 22 participants (95%) attended the second session within four hours after testing session one. Under single-task testing, estimated ICCs, SEMs, MDCs, and Kappa coefficients ranged from 0.24 to 0.99, 0.3 to 23, 0.8 to 64, and 0.03 to 0.64, respectively. Under dual-task testing, estimated ICCs, SEMs, MDCs, and Kappa coefficients ranged from 0.70 to 0.99, 0.4 to 17, 1.1 to 47, and 0.39 to 0.83, respectively. A learning effect was identified for all tests under all conditions. CONCLUSION: The BESS is the only clinical test that demonstrated acceptable reliability for clinical use under single-task testing conditions. The BESS, TGT, and CRT all demonstrated acceptable reliability for clinical use under dual-task testing conditions. A practice session should be used to reduce the possible learning effect seen. Further studies examining sources of the systematic error observed are needed. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2b.
BACKGROUND: Previous researchers have suggested that balance control deficits are detected more accurately with dual-task testing than single-task testing. However, it is necessary to examine the clinimetric properties of dual-task testing before employing it in clinical and research settings. OBJECTIVE: To examine and compare the relative and absolute reliability of the Balance Error Scoring System (BESS), Tandem Gait Test (TGT), and Clinical Reaction Time (CRT) under single and dual-task conditions in uninjured active youth and young adults.Study Design: Single-group, repeated-measures study. METHODS: Twenty-three individuals [9 female; median age 17 years] completed three trials of the BESS, TGT, and CRT under single and dual-task testing conditions during testing session one. Two raters assessed participants to assess inter-rater reliability. Either later on the same day or the following day, the protocol was repeated by one rater to assess intra-rater reliability. The average of three trials was used to calculate intra-rater (between-session) and inter-rater (within-session) intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM), minimal detectable change (MDC), and Cohen's Kappa coefficient for tests as appropriate under both conditions. Bland-Altman plots (mean difference and 95% limits of agreement) were used to assess for a systematic error associated with a learning effect. RESULTS: Only one participant attended the second session on the following day, while 22 participants (95%) attended the second session within four hours after testing session one. Under single-task testing, estimated ICCs, SEMs, MDCs, and Kappa coefficients ranged from 0.24 to 0.99, 0.3 to 23, 0.8 to 64, and 0.03 to 0.64, respectively. Under dual-task testing, estimated ICCs, SEMs, MDCs, and Kappa coefficients ranged from 0.70 to 0.99, 0.4 to 17, 1.1 to 47, and 0.39 to 0.83, respectively. A learning effect was identified for all tests under all conditions. CONCLUSION: The BESS is the only clinical test that demonstrated acceptable reliability for clinical use under single-task testing conditions. The BESS, TGT, and CRT all demonstrated acceptable reliability for clinical use under dual-task testing conditions. A practice session should be used to reduce the possible learning effect seen. Further studies examining sources of the systematic error observed are needed. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2b.
Authors: Anthony G Schneiders; S John Sullivan; Andrew R Gray; Graeme D Hammond-Tooke; Paul R McCrory Journal: J Sci Med Sport Date: 2009-06-27 Impact factor: 4.319
Authors: Luke M Ross; Johna K Register-Mihalik; Jason P Mihalik; Karen L McCulloch; William E Prentice; Edgar W Shields; Kevin M Guskiewicz Journal: J Sport Rehabil Date: 2011-08 Impact factor: 1.931
Authors: Paul McCrory; Willem Meeuwisse; Jiří Dvořák; Mark Aubry; Julian Bailes; Steven Broglio; Robert C Cantu; David Cassidy; Ruben J Echemendia; Rudy J Castellani; Gavin A Davis; Richard Ellenbogen; Carolyn Emery; Lars Engebretsen; Nina Feddermann-Demont; Christopher C Giza; Kevin M Guskiewicz; Stanley Herring; Grant L Iverson; Karen M Johnston; James Kissick; Jeffrey Kutcher; John J Leddy; David Maddocks; Michael Makdissi; Geoff T Manley; Michael McCrea; William P Meehan; Shinji Nagahiro; Jon Patricios; Margot Putukian; Kathryn J Schneider; Allen Sills; Charles H Tator; Michael Turner; Pieter E Vos Journal: Br J Sports Med Date: 2017-04-26 Impact factor: 13.800
Authors: Heather A Shepherd; Cody R van Rassel; Amanda M Black; Robert F Graham; Keith Owen Yeates; Carolyn A Emery; Kathryn J Schneider Journal: Int J Sports Phys Ther Date: 2022-04-01
Authors: Marica Giardini; Ilaria Arcolin; Marco Godi; Simone Guglielmetti; Alessandro Maretti; Armando Capelli; Stefano Corna Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-08-26 Impact factor: 4.614