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

A systematic review of validity and reliability assessment of measuring balance and walking at the level of International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) in people with spinal cord injury

Context: A spinal cord injury (SCI) is associated with a wide range of impairments in functioning, many limitations in activity, and restrictions for patients.Objectives: The present study aimed to systematically review the psychometric properties (reliability and validity) of outcome measures used to assess walking and balance in people with spinal cord injury.Methods: Databases such as PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Sciences were searched for relevant articles using various terms (title and abstract). Articles including the outcome measures of spinal cord injury patients and published in English from 2010 until 2021 were selected, and the quality of the selected studies was determined by applying the COSMIN checklist. Reliability and validity values were extracted, and conclusions were drawn about the psychometric quality of each measure.Results: A total of 1253 records were retrieved, and among them 22 potentially eligible articles were identified, 15 of which were included in the present study. The COSMIN tool (Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement Instruments) was used to evaluate the quality level of imported articles based on the inclusion criteria.Conclusions: One consideration for testing people with disabilities is to observe the reliability and validity of the instrument, which was addressed in this study in various fields. In our study, seven tools for assessing SCI were evaluated, and it was found that the 10-meter walk (10MWT) tool performs better and more easily than other tools. The Mini-BESTest tool was suggested as a reliable tool for assessing standing balance in SCI subjects.

Reliability of the Mini-BESTest and Brief-BESTest for assessing patients with incomplete spinal cord injury

STUDY DESIGN

Single institution observational study.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the ceiling and floor effects of the Berg Balance Scale (BBS), Mini-Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest), and Brief-BESTest, as well as to determine the intra- and inter-rater reliabilities and minimal detectable change (MDC) of the Mini-BESTest and Brief-BESTest in patients with acute and subacute incomplete cervical spinal cord injury (SCI) classified as AIS D.

SETTING

Advanced critical care center of our university hospital.

METHODS

Twenty patients with incomplete cervical SCI who could stand without assistance were recruited. The floor and ceiling effects were evaluated by plotting histograms from the distribution of scores on the BBS, Mini-BESTest and Brief-BESTest, and calculating skewness. The Mini-BESTest and Brief-BESTest were evaluated and videotaped simultaneously, and intra- and inter-rater reliabilities were assessed. The MDC was also calculated.

RESULTS

The skewness of the BBS was -1.57, and the full score was 35%, indicating a ceiling effect. However, no ceiling or floor effect was observed for the Mini-BESTest and the Brief-BESTest. Intraclass correlation coefficients for intra-rater and inter-rater reliabilities were 0.98 and 0.97 for the Mini-BESTest and Brief-BESTest, respectively. Individual item reliability was moderate or better for the Mini-BESTest and excellent or better for the Brief-BESTest. The MDC of total scores ranged 3.14-3.84 and 2.92-3.60 for the Mini-BESTest and Brief-BESTest, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The Mini-BESTest and Brief-BESTest are reliable assessment tools for patients with acute and subacute incomplete SCI classified as AIS D. Clarified error ranges aid in estimating the treatment effect on balance abilities.

European Portuguese version of the Mini-BESTest: a cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric measurements in individuals with sensorimotor impairments

PURPOSE

This study aimed to translate and cross-culturally adapt the Mini-BESTest into European Portuguese and to evaluate its psychometric properties in individuals with sensorimotor impairments.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A cross-sectional cross-cultural adaptation and validation study was conducted according to the COSMIN guidelines and the STROBE statement. The study included 100 participants with sensorimotor impairments who were able to walk 6 m. Cronbach's alpha and item-total correlations were used to assess internal consistency. Interpretability was assessed by examining floor and ceiling effects and skewness. To investigate construct validity, Spearman correlation coefficients and Bland-Altman analysis were performed to compare the Berg Balance Scale and the Mini-BESTest Inter- and intra-rater reliability were assessed by calculating the ICC, SEM and MDC based on video recordings of the participants during the Mini-BESTest assessments.

RESULTS

The European Portuguese Mini-BESTest showed good internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.892) and no significant floor or ceiling effects. Excellent inter- and intra-rater reliability (ICC = 0.97) were also demonstrated, with MDC of 2.58 and 2.57, respectively. Furthermore, this instrument showed a significant correlation with the BBS (r = 0.902). Bland-Altman analysis showed small absolute differences.

CONCLUSION

The European Portuguese Mini-BESTest is comparable to the original English version in terms of validity and reliability and is therefore highly recommended for use by Portuguese-speaking professionals to assess postural control.

The test-retest reliability and limits of agreement of the balance evaluation systems test (BESTest) in young people with intellectual disability

Clinical tests for the assessment of postural balance in people with intellectual disability have been the most commonly used single or multi-item tests, but some tests have been developed, such as the BESTest. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the test-retest reliability and limits of agreement of the Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest) in young people with intellectual disabilities. A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted with 65 young people (ages 16-25 years) with intellectual disability. The participants completed the BESTest (27 items) twice. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and standard error of measurement (SEM) were calculated to determine the test-retest reliability of the BESTest. The BESTest overall scores' test-retest reliability was rated as excellent (≥ 0.75). Stability limits/verticality and reactive are fair to good (≥ 0.40- < 0.75). Biomechanical constraints, transitions and anticipatory movements, sensory orientation, and gait stability were excellent (≥ 0.75). Current evidence shows that young people with intellectual disabilities have impaired postural balance. However, there appears to be a lack of assessment tools that reliably evaluate the postural balance of this population. The results from this investigation show that BESTest provides "excellent reliability" (≥ 0.75) to assess postural balance in young people with intellectual disability.

Measurement properties of the Brazilian version of the Stroke Upper Limb Capacity Scale (SULCS-Brazil)

BACKGROUND

The Stroke Upper Limb Capacity Scale (SULCS) is a clinically useful measure of upper-limb (UL) capacity, which assesses both basic and advanced capacities.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the reliability, construct validity, and interpretability of the SULCS-Brazil with community-dwelling individuals with stroke.

METHODS

The SULCS-Brazil and measures of impairment (handgrip strength and motor function of the paretic UL), capacity (manual and digital dexterities), and performance were applied during the first session, to establish construct validity (80 patients). The SULCS-Brazil was applied again during a second session (a sub-set of 30 patients), to investigate test-retest reliability. Test-retest reliability was evaluated using kappa statistics (k) for the individual items, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for the total scores, standard error of measurement (SEM), minimal detectable change (MDC), and Bland-Altman plot. For the evaluation of construct validity, pre-defined hypotheses were created to estimate the strength of the correlations between the SULCS-Brazil scores and established measures of UL function, using Spearman correlation coefficients. Interpretability was investigated by evaluating both ceiling/ floor effects.

RESULTS

High level of agreement was found between the SUCLS-Brazil total scores obtained on both applications (ICC = 0.98; 95%CI:0.96-0.99) and 80% of the individual items had almost perfect agreement (k= 0.81-1.0). The SEM (0.46) and the MDC (1.27) showed clinically acceptable values. All pre-defined hypotheses were confirmed, indicating adequate construct validity of the SULCS-Brazil. No significant ceiling/floor effects were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The SULCS-Brazil showed to be reliable and valid for the evaluation of upper-limb capacity of individuals with stroke.

Diagnostic tests to assess balance in patients with spinal cord injury: a systematic review of their validity and reliability

Background

Sophisticated biomechanical instruments can assess balance in patients with spinal cord injury (SCI) with accuracy and precision; however, they are costly and time consuming to use. Clinical diagnostic tests to assess balance in patients with SCI are less costly and easier to use, but there is limited literature available regarding their reliability and validity.

Objectives

To review systematically articles reporting the validity and reliability of diagnostic tests used to assess balance function in patients with SCI.

Methods

We searched for articles in the English language from the earliest record to December 15, 2020, which reported validity or reliability of any clinical instrument or diagnostic test used to assess balance in patients with SCI. Articles assessing balance in paraplegic patients with causes other than SCI were excluded. Databases included MEDLINE, AMED, EMBASE, HMIC, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Scopus, and Google Scholar. The COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist was used to assess the studies included and PRISMA-DTA guidelines were applied.

Results

We included 16 articles that assessed the validity or reliability of 10 diagnostic tests. The Functional Reach Test (FRT), Berg Balance Scale (BBS), and Mini-Balance Evaluation Systems Test (Mini-BESTest) were assessed by more than 1 study, while the remaining 7 diagnostic tests including the Function in Sitting Test, T-Shirt Test, Motor Assessment Scale item 3, Sitting Balance Score, 5 Times Sit-to-Stand Test, Tinetti scale, and Sitting Balance Measure were assessed by 1 study each. The FRT has good-to-excellent test-retest reliability, excellent inter-rater reliability, and good construct, concurrent, and convergent validity. The BBS has excellent inter-rater and intra-rater reliability, high internal consistency, and good concurrent and construct validity. The Mini-BESTest has excellent test-retest reliability, excellent inter-rater reliability, high internal consistency, and good concurrent, convergent, and construct validity.

Conclusions

The FRT, BBS, and Mini-BESTest appear to be valid and reliable clinical instruments to assess balance function in patients with SCI.

Test-Retest Reliability of the Mini-BESTest in People With Mild to Moderate Multiple Sclerosis

OBJECTIVE

The mini-Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest) is a balance measure for assessment of the underlying physiological systems for balance control in adults. Evaluations of test-retest reliability of the mini-BESTest in larger samples of people with multiple sclerosis (MS) are lacking. The purpose of this study was to investigate test-retest reliability of the mini-BESTest total and section sum scores and individual items in people with mild to moderate overall MS disability.

METHODS

This study used a test-retest design in a movement laboratory setting. Fifty-four people with mild to moderate overall MS disability according to the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) were included, with 28 in the mild subgroup (EDSS 2.0-3.5) and 26 in the moderate subgroup (EDSS 4.0-5.5). Test-retest reliability of the mini-BESTest was evaluated by repeated measurements taken 1 week apart. Reliability and measurement error were analyzed.

RESULTS

Test-retest reliability for the total scores was considered good to excellent, with intraclass correlation coefficients of .88 for the whole sample, .83 for the mild MS subgroup, and .80 for the moderate MS subgroup. Measurement errors were small, with standard error of measurement and minimal detectable change of 1.3 and 3.5, respectively, in mild MS, and 1.7 and 4.7, respectively, in moderate MS. The limits of agreement were -3.4 and 4.6. Test-retest reliability for the section scores were fair to good or excellent; weighted kappa values ranged from .62 to .83. All items but 1 showed fair to good or excellent test-retest reliability, and percentage agreement ranged from 61% to 100%.

CONCLUSION

The mini-BESTest demonstrated good to excellent test-retest reliability and small measurement errors and is recommended for use in people with mild to moderate MS.

IMPACT

Knowledge of limits of agreement and minimal detectable change contribute to the interpretability of the mini-BESTest total score. The findings of this study enhance the clinical usefulness of the test for evaluation of balance control and for designing individually customized balance training with high precision and accuracy in people with MS.

Quantifying balance control after spinal cord injury: Reliability and validity of the mini-BESTest

Context/Objective: Incomplete spinal cord injury (iSCI) causes deficits in balance control. The Mini-Balance Evaluation Systems Test (mini-BESTest) is a comprehensive measure; however, further testing of its psychometric properties among the iSCI population is needed. We evaluated the mini-BESTest's test-retest reliability, and concurrent and convergent validity among individuals living with iSCI for more than one year. Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: Rehabilitation hospital. Participants: Twenty-one individuals with chronic motor iSCI (14 females, mean age 56.8 ± 14.0 years). Interventions: None. Outcome Measures: Participants completed the mini-BESTest at two sessions spaced two weeks apart. At the second session, participants performed tests of lower extremity muscle strength and quiet standing on a force platform with eyes opened (EO) and eyes closed (EC). Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) evaluated test-retest reliability. To evaluate concurrent and convergent validity, Pearson's correlation coefficient (r) quantified relationships between mini-BESTest scores and measures of center of pressure (COP) velocity during EO and EC standing, and lower extremity muscle strength, respectively. Results: Test-retest reliability of the mini-BESTest total score and sub-scale scores were high (ICC = 0.94-0.98). Mini-BESTest scores were inversely correlated with COP velocity when standing with EO (r = 0.54-0.71, P < 0.05), but not with EC. Lower extremity strength correlated strongly with mini-BESTest total scores (r = 0.73, P < 0.001). Conclusion: The mini-BESTest has high test-retest reliability, and concurrent and convergent validity in individuals with chronic iSCI.