Publication:
Comparison of measurement properties of three shortened versions of the balance evaluation system test (BESTest) in people with subacute stroke

dc.contributor.authorThitimard Winairuken_US
dc.contributor.authorMarco Y.C. Pangen_US
dc.contributor.authorVitoon Saengsirisuwanen_US
dc.contributor.authorFay B. Horaken_US
dc.contributor.authorRumpa Boonsinsukhen_US
dc.contributor.otherMahidol Universityen_US
dc.contributor.otherHong Kong Polytechnic Universityen_US
dc.contributor.otherOregon National Primate Research Centeren_US
dc.contributor.otherSrinakharinwirot Universityen_US
dc.date.accessioned2020-01-27T08:50:43Z
dc.date.available2020-01-27T08:50:43Z
dc.date.issued2019-01-01en_US
dc.description.abstract© 2019 Foundation of Rehabilitation Information. Objectives: To examine the reliability, validity and responsiveness of 3 different short versions of the Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest: SBESTest, Brief-BESTest and Mini-BESTest) in patients with subacute stroke. Design: A prospective cohort study. Participants: Patients with subacute stroke. Methods: Patients were assessed using the full BESTest. Scores of 3 short-form BESTests were later extracted. The intra-rater and inter-rater reliability (n = 12) were gathered from 5 raters. Concurrent validity was assessed with the Berg Balance Scale (BBS). Floor/ceiling effect, internal responsiveness and external responsiveness with the BBS (n = 70) were assessed at baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks post-rehabilitation. Results and conclusion: All short-form BESTests demonstrated excellent intra-rater and inter-rater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.95-0.99) and excellent concurrent validity (r = 0.93-0.96). Unlike the Brief-BESTest and Mini-BESTest, the S-BESTest and BESTest had no significant foor/ceiling effects (< 20%). The standardized response mean of all 4 BESTest versions were large, ranging between 1.19 and 1.57, indicating sufficient internal responsiveness. The area under the curve of the S-BESTest and BESTest were significantly higher than the Brief-BESTest and Mini-BESTest, reflecting better accuracy of the S-BESTest and BESTest in identifying patients with subacute stroke who had balance improvement using the minimal clinically important difference of 6 and 16 points, respectively. These findings suggest that the S-BESTest is a short-form BESTest that is appropriate for assessing balance impairments in patients with subacute stroke.en_US
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Rehabilitation Medicine. Vol.51, No.9 (2019), 683-691en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.2340/16501977-2589en_US
dc.identifier.issn16501977en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-85072943456en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/50972
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.rights.holderSCOPUSen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85072943456&origin=inwarden_US
dc.subjectHealth Professionsen_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.titleComparison of measurement properties of three shortened versions of the balance evaluation system test (BESTest) in people with subacute strokeen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85072943456&origin=inwarden_US

Files

Collections