Responsiveness of the Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest) in People With Subacute Stroke

Author:

Chinsongkram Butsara1,Chaikeeree Nithinun2,Saengsirisuwan Vitoon3,Horak Fay B.4,Boonsinsukh Rumpa5

Affiliation:

1. B. Chinsongkram, PhD, Faculty of Physical Therapy, Rangsit University, Pathum Thani, Thailand.

2. N. Chaikeeree, PhD, Division of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Health Science, Srinakharinwirot University, Nakhonnayok, Thailand.

3. V. Saengsirisuwan, PhD, Department of Physiology, Faculty of Science, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.

4. F.B. Horak, PhD, Balance Disorders Laboratory, Department of Neurology, Oregon Health and Science University, Beaverton, Oregon, and Portland VA Medical Center, Portland, Oregon.

5. R. Boonsinsukh, PhD, Division of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Health Science, Srinakharinwirot University, 63 Moo 7, Nakhonnayok, Thailand.

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundThe reliability and convergent validity of the Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest) in people with subacute stroke have been established, but its responsiveness to rehabilitation has not been examined.ObjectiveThe study objective was to compare the responsiveness of the BESTest with those of other clinical balance tools in people with subacute stroke.DesignThis was a prospective cohort study.MethodsForty-nine people with subacute stroke (mean age=57.8 years, SD=11.8) participated in this study. Five balance measures—the BESTest, the Mini-BESTest, the Berg Balance Scale, the Postural Assessment Scale for Stroke Patients, and the Community Balance and Mobility Scale (CB&M)—were used to measure balance performance before and after rehabilitation or before discharge from the hospital, whichever came first. The internal responsiveness of each balance measure was classified with the standardized response mean (SRM); changes in Berg Balance Scale scores of greater than 7 were used as the external standard for determining the external responsiveness. Analysis of the receiver operating characteristic curve was used to determine the accuracy and cutoff scores for identifying participants with balance improvement.ResultsParticipants received 13.7 days (SD=9.3, range=5–44) of physical therapy rehabilitation. The internal responsiveness of all balance measures, except for the CB&M, was high (SRM=0.9–1.2). The BESTest had a higher SRM than the Mini-BESTest and the CB&M, indicating that the BESTest was more sensitive for detecting balance changes than the Mini-BESTest and the CB&M. In addition, compared with other balance measures, the BESTest had no floor, ceiling, or responsive ceiling effects. The results also indicated that the percentage of participants with no change in scores after rehabilitation was smaller with the BESTest than with the Mini-BESTest and the CB&M. With regard to the external responsiveness, the BESTest had higher accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and posttest accuracy than the Postural Assessment Scale for Stroke Patients and the CB&M for identifying participants with balance improvement. Changes in BESTest scores of 10% or more indicated changes in balance performance.LimitationsA limitation of this study was the difference in the time periods between the first and the second assessments across participants.ConclusionsThe BESTest was the most sensitive scale for assessing balance recovery in participants with subacute stroke because of its high internal and external responsiveness and lack of floor and ceiling effects.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3