Publication:
Reliability and validity of the Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest) in people with subacute stroke

dc.contributor.authorButsara Chinsongkramen_US
dc.contributor.authorNithinun Chaikeereeen_US
dc.contributor.authorVitoon Saengsirisuwanen_US
dc.contributor.authorNitaya Viriyatharakijen_US
dc.contributor.authorFay B. Horaken_US
dc.contributor.authorRumpa Boonsinsukhen_US
dc.contributor.otherSrinakharinwirot Universityen_US
dc.contributor.otherMahidol Universityen_US
dc.contributor.otherOregon National Primate Research Centeren_US
dc.contributor.otherRangsit Universityen_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-11-09T02:20:19Z
dc.date.available2018-11-09T02:20:19Z
dc.date.issued2014-11-01en_US
dc.description.abstract© 2014 American Physical Therapy Association. Background. The Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest) is a new clinical balance assessment tool, but it has never been validated in patients with subacute stroke.Objective. The purpose of this study was to examine the reliability and validity of the BESTest in patients with subacute stroke.Design. This was an observational reliability and validity study.Methods. Twelve patients participated in the interrater and intrarater reliability study. Convergent validity was investigated in 70 patients using the Berg Balance Scale (BBS), Postural Assessment Scale for Stroke (PASS), Community Balance and Mobility Scale (CB&M), and Mini-BESTest. The receiver operating characteristic curve was used to calculate the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the BESTest, Mini- BESTest, and BBS in classifying participants into low functional ability (LFA) and high functional ability (HFA) groups based on Fugl-Meyer Assessment motor subscale scores.Results. The BESTest showed excellent intrarater reliability and interrater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient=.99) and was highly correlated with the BBS (Spearman r=.96), PASS (r=.96), CB&M (r=.91), and Mini-BESTest (r=.96), indicating excellent convergent validity. No floor or ceiling effects were observed with the BESTest. In contrast, the Mini-BESTest and CB&M had a floor effect in the LFA group, and the BBS and PASS demonstrated responsive ceiling effects in the HFA group. In addition, the BESTest showed high accuracy as the BBS and Mini-BESTest in separating participants into HFA and LFA groups.Limitation. Whether the results are generalizable to patients with chronic stroke is unknown.Conclusion. The BESTest is reliable, valid, sensitive, and specific in assessing balance in people with subacute stroke across all levels of functional disability.en_US
dc.identifier.citationPhysical Therapy. Vol.94, No.11 (2014), 1632-1643en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.2522/ptj.20130558en_US
dc.identifier.issn15386724en_US
dc.identifier.issn00319023en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-84908408867en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/33928
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.rights.holderSCOPUSen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84908408867&origin=inwarden_US
dc.subjectHealth Professionsen_US
dc.titleReliability and validity of the Balance Evaluation Systems 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=84908408867&origin=inwarden_US

Files

Collections