Comparison of the Validity of Four Fall-Related Psychological Measures in a Community-Based Falls Risk Screening

Moore, Delilah S.; Ellis, Rebecca; Kosma, Maria; Fabre, J; McCarter, Kevin S.; Wood, Robert H.

doi:10.1080/02701367.2011.10599787

Cited by 37 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although the ABC Scale and the FES-I have similar items and are highly correlated ( r = 0.68), there are also differences between the scales. The ABC Scale has more questions on gait, while the FES-I has more focus on social activities [34]. This may also explain the higher correlations between the BESTests and the ABC Scale compared to our findings.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 48%

Interrater and test-retest reliability and validity of the Norwegian version of the BESTest and mini-BESTest in people with increased risk of falling

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest) was developed to assess underlying systems for balance control in order to be able to individually tailor rehabilitation interventions to people with balance disorders. A short form, the Mini-BESTest, was developed as a screening test. The study aimed to assess interrater and test-retest reliability of the Norwegian version of the BESTest and the Mini-BESTest in community-dwelling people with increased risk of falling and to assess concurrent validity with the Fall Efficacy Scale-International (FES-I), and it was an observational study with a cross-sectional design.MethodsForty-two persons with increased risk of falling (elderly over 65 years of age, persons with a history of stroke or Multiple Sclerosis) were assessed twice by two raters. Relative reliability was analysed with Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC), and absolute reliability with standard error of measurement (SEM) and smallest detectable change (SDC). Concurrent validity was assessed against the FES-I using Spearman’s rho.ResultsThe BESTest showed very good interrater reliability (ICC = 0.98, SEM = 1.79, SDC95 = 5.0) and test-retest reliability (rater A/rater B = ICC = 0.89/0.89, SEM = 3.9/4.3, SDC95 = 10.8/11.8). The Mini-BESTest also showed very good interrater reliability (ICC = 0.95, SEM = 1.19, SDC95 = 3.3) and test-retest reliability (rater A/rater B = ICC = 0.85/0.84, SEM = 1.8/1.9, SDC95 = 4.9/5.2). The correlations were moderate between the FES-I and both the BESTest and the Mini-BESTest (Spearman’s rho −0.51 and-0.50, p < 0.01).ConclusionThe BESTest and its short form, the Mini-BESTest, showed very good interrater and test-retest reliability when assessed in a heterogeneous sample of people with increased risk of falling. The concurrent validity measured against the FES-I showed moderate correlation. The results are comparable with earlier studies and indicate that the Norwegian versions can be used in daily clinic and in research.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 48%

Interrater and test-retest reliability and validity of the Norwegian version of the BESTest and mini-BESTest in people with increased risk of falling

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Test-retest reliability of the FES-I has ranged from 0.79 to 0.96 in older adult populations (8,9,11). Furthermore, validity of the instrument has been demonstrated by comparison between different subject groups and with different measures (8–10,14). In a previous validity study, the FES-I was significantly associated with ABC (r = −0.68) (14).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliability and Validity of the Falls Efficacy Scale–International (FES-I) in Individuals With Dizziness and Imbalance

Morgan

Friscia²,

Whitney³

et al. 2013

Otology &Amp; Neurotology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hypothesis The purpose of this research is to establish the test-retest reliability and convergent validity of the Falls Efficacy Scale-International (FES-I) in people with vestibular disorders. Background Individuals with vestibular dysfunction have an increased risk of falling. The FES-I is a measure used to quantify an individual’s concern of falling during different tasks. Methods A cross-sectional descriptive study was used in order to determine the test-retest reliability and convergent validity of the FES-I. Fifty-three individuals with vestibular or balance dysfunction completed the FES-I twice during an initial evaluation by a neurotologist. Test-retest reliability was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient. The convergent validity was measured by correlating the FES-I with the Activities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) scale, Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI), Vestibular Activities and Participation (VAP) scale, 4-item Dynamic Gait Index (DGI-4), and measuring gait speed. Results The FES-I demonstrated high test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient, model 3,1: 0.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.90–0.97) and had concurrent validity with other self-report and physical performance measures (correlation coefficients for the ABC: −0.84; DHI: 0.75; VAP: 0.78, gait speed: −0.55; and DGI-4: −0.55). Conclusion The FES-I is a reliable and valid tool for measuring an individual’s concern of falling in a sample of people with vestibular disorders.

show abstract

“…The CoF scale consists of 12 items that measure concerns about the CoF among community-dwelling older adults. The CoF measures four types of fear including fear of physical injury, fear of long-term physical incapacity, subjective anxiety, and social discomfort [48,51]. Each item is rated on a 4-point scale (1 = strongly disagree to 4 = strongly agree), and higher scores represent more concerns about the CoF.…”

Section: Concerns About the Cof Scalementioning

confidence: 99%

The Avoidance of Activities due to Fear of Falling Contributes to Sedentary Behavior among Community-Dwelling Older Adults with Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain: A Multisite Observational Study

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Comparison of the Validity of Four Fall-Related Psychological Measures in a Community-Based Falls Risk Screening

Cited by 37 publications

References 33 publications

Interrater and test-retest reliability and validity of the Norwegian version of the BESTest and mini-BESTest in people with increased risk of falling

Interrater and test-retest reliability and validity of the Norwegian version of the BESTest and mini-BESTest in people with increased risk of falling

Reliability and Validity of the Falls Efficacy Scale–International (FES-I) in Individuals With Dizziness and Imbalance

The Avoidance of Activities due to Fear of Falling Contributes to Sedentary Behavior among Community-Dwelling Older Adults with Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain: A Multisite Observational Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About