The Comparison Between Instrumented and Observer-Rated Measures of the Modified Balance Error Scoring System: A Critically Appraised Topic

Abstract

Clinical Scenario: Postural control deficits are one of the most common impairments associated with sport-related concussion. The Modified Balance Error Scoring System (mBESS) is one of the current standard clinical measures for assessing these deficits; however, it is dependent upon observer-rated measurements. Advancements in inertial measurement units (IMUs) lend themselves to be a viable option in objectifying postural control assessments, such as the mBESS. Clinical Question: Are IMU-based measures of the mBESS more effective than observer-rated measures of the mBESS in identifying patients with sport-related concussion? Summary of Key Findings: Following a systematic search, three studies were included. One study compared observer-rated measures of the Balance Error Scoring System and mBESS to instrumented measures of both tests and determined that the instrumented mBESS had the highest diagnostic accuracy. The results of the second study determined that IMU-based measures were successful in both classifying group and identifying task errors. The final study found that using IMUs increased sensitivity of the mBESS, specifically the double-limb stance, to group classification. Clinical Bottom Line: Instrumentation of the mBESS using IMUs provides more objective and sensitive measures of postural control in patients with SRC. Strength of Recommendation: Due to the consistent, good-quality evidence used to answer this critically appraised topic, the grade of A is recommended by the Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy.