Pragmatic Evaluation of Aspects Concerning Validity and Feasibility of the Mini Balance Evaluation System Test in a Specialized Rehabilitation Hospital

Roaldsen, Kirsti Skavberg; Wakefield, E; Opheim, Arve

doi:10.15344/2455-7498/2015/104

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the simultaneous presence of two physiotherapists has been suggested during the assessment of patients with severe cognitive or physical impairments (Roaldsen et al, 2015). This would result in higher costs in terms of human resources, but dynamic balance requires more ability than static balance control, and more challenging items (both for the patient and for the raters) are needed for a thorough study of balance performance.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Mini-BESTest: a review of psychometric properties

Carlo

Bravini

Vercelli

et al. 2016

International Journal of Rehabilitation Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Mini-Balance Evaluation Systems Test (Mini-BESTest) has been identified as the most comprehensive balance measure for community-dwelling adults and elderly individuals. It can be used to assess balance impairments in several other conditions, mainly Parkinson's disease and stroke. Despite increasing use of the Mini-BESTest since it was first published 5 years ago, no systematic review synthesizing its psychometric properties is available. The aim of this study was to provide a comprehensive review of the psychometric properties of the Mini-BESTest when administered to patients with balance deficits because of different diseases. A literature search was performed on articles published before July 2015 in journals indexed by MEDLINE and Scopus databases. The search produced 98 papers, 24 of which fulfilled the inclusion criteria for this review. Most papers (n=19) focused on patients affected by neurological diseases, mainly Parkinson's disease. In 21 papers, the psychometric characteristics were analyzed using Classical Test Theory methods and in only three papers was Rasch analysis carried out. This review shows the interest of researchers in the Mini-BESTest despite the short time frame since its first publication. The Mini-BESTest is used widely in both clinical practice and research. The results support the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of this instrument and it can be considered a standard balance measure. However, it would be valuable to learn more about how this scale performs in different diseases causing balance deficits and to better define the minimal clinically important difference for each disease.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Mini-BESTest: a review of psychometric properties

Carlo

Bravini

Vercelli

et al. 2016

International Journal of Rehabilitation Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They also found that the score could differentiate adults with a SCI walking with/without walking aids and those having low/high concerns about falling. No ceiling effect was mentioned in any previous study (Chinsongkram et al, 2014;Chiu and Pang, 2017;Goljar et al, 2017;Hamre, Botolfsen, Tangen, and Helbostad, 2017;Jacome, Cruz, Oliveira, and Marques, 2016;Jørgensen et al, 2017;Marques et al, 2016;Roaldsen, Wakefield, and Opheim, 2015;Schlenstedt et al, 2015). However, the test-retest and inter-rater reliability, as well as the minimal detectable change (MDC), have not yet been established in adults with SCI in a rehabilitation setting.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…It is more clinically applicable than its longer version (15 minutes vs 45 minutes) (Franchignoni et al, 2015) and assesses 14 items coming from 4 of the 6 BESTest components of standing balance: anticipatory postural control (subscale I: 3 items), reactive postural control (subscale II: 3 items), sensory orientation (subscale III: 3 items) and dynamic gait (subscale IV: 5 items). Roaldsen, Wakefield, and Opheim (2015) explored the usefulness of the mini-BESTest for the rehabilitation of adults with various diagnoses, including SCI.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliability and minimal detectable change of the mini-BESTest in adults with spinal cord injury in a rehabilitation setting

Roy

Higgins

Nadeau

2019

Physiotherapy Theory and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. The mini-Balance Evaluation Systems Test (mini-BESTest) is a valid tool for assessing standing balance in people with spinal cord injury (SCI). Its reliability has not yet been investigated with this population.Objective. To assess the test-retest and inter-rater reliability of the mini-BESTest in adults with SCI in a rehabilitation setting.Methods. Twenty-three participants admitted in a rehabilitation center following a SCI (mean age = 52.2 years, SD = 14.5; 13/23 tetraplegia; 14/23 traumatic injury) and able to stand 30 seconds without help were recruited. They were evaluated twice with the mini-BESTest to establish the test-retest reliability (interval of 1 to 2 days). One of the two sessions was video-recorded to establish the inter-rater reliability (3 physiotherapists).Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC2,1), weighted kappa (Kw) and Kendall's W were used to determine reliability of total score and individual items. Minimal detectable changes (MDC) were computed.Results. The mini-BESTest total scores showed excellent test-retest (ICC=0.94) and inter-rater (ICC=0.96) reliability. Reliability of 50% of the individual items was acceptable to excellent (w and W = 0.35 -1.00). The MDC of the mini-BESTest total score was 4 points. Conclusion.The mini-BESTest is a reliable tool to assess standing balance in adults with a SCI. A minimal change of 4 points on the total scale is needed to be confident that the change is not a measurement error between two sessions or two raters.

show abstract

“…The BESTest is organized around the systems underlying balance control and, similar to the Physiological Profile Approach, it takes over 30 min to administer; however, it has good reliability and a higher sensitivity to change than the BBS [11]. Its short version, i.e., the mini-BESTest, takes only ∼15 min to administer and has good reliability and discriminative validity between fallers and nonfallers [12], yet the reported scores vary widely and suggest a floor effect in patients with a spinal cord injury, a traumatic brain injury, an acquired brain injury, and multiple traumas [13]. Static posturography measures static balance and correlates poorly with dynamic balance [14].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beam Walking to Assess Dynamic Balance in Health and Disease: A Protocol for the “BEAM” Multicenter Observational Study

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Dynamic balance keeps the vertical projection of the center of mass within the base of support while walking. Dynamic balance tests are used to predict the risks of falls and eventual falls. The psychometric properties of most dynamic balance tests are unsatisfactory and do not comprise an actual loss of balance while walking. Objectives: Using beam walking distance as a measure of dynamic balance, the BEAM consortium will determine the psychometric properties, lifespan and patient reference values, the relationship with selected “dynamic balance tests,” and the accuracy of beam walking distance to predict falls. Methods: This cross-sectional observational study will examine healthy adults in 7 decades (n = 432) at 4 centers. Center 5 will examine patients (n = 100) diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease, multiple sclerosis, stroke, and balance disorders. In test 1, all participants will be measured for demographics, medical history, muscle strength, gait, static balance, dynamic balance using beam walking under single (beam walking only) and dual task conditions (beam walking while concurrently performing an arithmetic task), and several cognitive functions. Patients and healthy participants age 50 years or older will be additionally measured for fear of falling, history of falls, miniBESTest, functional reach on a force platform, timed up and go, and reactive balance. All participants age 50 years or older will be recalled to report fear of falling and fall history 6 and 12 months after test 1. In test 2, seven to ten days after test 1, healthy young adults and age 50 years or older (n = 40) will be retested for reliability of beam walking performance. Conclusion: We expect to find that beam walking performance vis-à-vis the traditionally used balance outcomes predicts more accurately fall risks and falls. Clinical Trial Registration Number: NCT03532984.

show abstract

Pragmatic Evaluation of Aspects Concerning Validity and Feasibility of the Mini Balance Evaluation System Test in a Specialized Rehabilitation Hospital

Cited by 3 publications

References 17 publications

The Mini-BESTest: a review of psychometric properties

The Mini-BESTest: a review of psychometric properties

Reliability and minimal detectable change of the mini-BESTest in adults with spinal cord injury in a rehabilitation setting

Beam Walking to Assess Dynamic Balance in Health and Disease: A Protocol for the “BEAM” Multicenter Observational Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About