Combined effects of strength and balance training versus aerobic training on balance, neuropathy symptoms and quality of life in patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathy

BACKGROUND

Diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) occurs in >50% of diabetic patients and is a high risk-factor of balance problems and risk of falls. Impaired balance can lead to reduced function, which has a detrimental effect on patients' quality of life. Structured strength and balance training can result in sustained improvements in muscle strength, coordination, balance, functional status and quality of life.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the combined effects of strength and balance training versus aerobic training on balance, severity of symptoms of DPN, and quality of life in patients with DPN.

METHODS

This double blinded, two arm parallel design Randomized Clinical Trial. The study was conducted from March to December 2020 in the AIMS diabetic center Peshawar, Pakistan. Participants were selected through convenience sampling technique and randomly allocated into strength plus balance and aerobic training groups. Type 2 diabetic patients of both sexes, aged 40 to 80 years, with a Toronto neuropathy score ≥6 recruited, while patients with ulceration/infection of feet, medical/Surgical conditions, and non-ambulatory patients were excluded from this study. Intervention was applied 3 days a week for 8 weeks. The Toronto clinical neuropathy system was used to assess neuropathy severity, SF-36 to assess quality of life and the Berg balance scale was used for assessment of balance. Assessment was done at the baseline and after 8 weeks of intervention using SPSS. Version 22 was used for analysis.

RESULTS

The mean age of the participants was 60.80 ± 9.73. Between group analysis, which showed were statistically insignificant for neuropathy severity, balance and all domains of quality of life (p-value >0.05) except SF-36 General Health Perception Score, with Mean ± SD of 62.50 ± 7.54 in group A versus Mean ± SD of in group B 60.00 ± 15.98 (p-value = 0.05). Within group analysis showed statistically significant results for neuropathy severity, balance and all domains of quality of life (p-value<0.05).

CONCLUSION

This study concluded that there is a statistically significant effect of structured balance and strength training and aerobic training on severity of DPN, balance and quality of life. But there was no statistically significant difference in improvement between the two intervention groups.

Pay attention: you can fall! The Mini-BESTest scale and the turning duration of the TUG test provide valid balance measures in neurological patients: a prospective study with falls as the balance criterion

Background

Balance, i.e., the ability not to fall, is often poor in neurological patients and this impairment increases their risk of falling. The Mini-Balance Evaluation System Test (Mini-BESTest), a rating scale, the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test, and gait measures are commonly used to quantify balance. This study assesses the criterion validity of these measures as balance measures.

Methods

The probability of being a faller within nine months was used as the balance criterion. The Mini-BESTest, TUG (instrumented with inertial sensors), and walking test were administered before and after inpatient rehabilitation. Multiple and LASSO logistic regressions were used for the analysis. The diagnostic accuracy of the model was assessed with the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic curve. Mobility measure validity was compared with the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC).

Results

Two hundred and fourteen neurological patients (stroke, peripheral neuropathy, or parkinsonism) were recruited. In total, 82 patients fell at least once in the nine-month follow-up. The Mini-BESTest (AUC = 0.69; 95%CI: 0.62-0.76), the duration of the TUG turning phase (AUC = 0.69; 0.62-0.76), and other TUG measures were significant faller predictors in regression models. However, only the turning duration (AIC = 274.0) and Mini-BESTest (AIC = 276.1) substantially improved the prediction of a baseline model, which only included fall risk factors from the medical history (AIC = 281.7). The LASSO procedure selected gender, disease chronicity, urinary incontinence, the Mini-BESTest, and turning duration as optimal faller predictors.

Conclusion

The TUG turning duration and the Mini-BESTest predict the chance of being a faller. Their criterion validity as balance measures in neurological patients is substantial.

Responsiveness of the Mini-Balance Evaluation System Test in Type 2 Diabetic Patients with Peripheral Neuropathy

Background

Mini-BESTest is an instrument for assessing the balance impairment; however, the use of the Mini-BESTest in type 2 diabetic patients with peripheral neuropathy is not well documented in the literature. The aim of this study was to examine the responsiveness and the minimal important change (MIC) of the Mini-BESTest after four weeks of the balance exercises.

Methods

A prospective single group pretest-posttest design was applied, and forty-eight type 2 diabetic patients with peripheral neuropathy were participated (mean age of 59.04 ± 7.533 years; 3 males and 45 females). All participants were given an intervention program including foot care and balance exercises (50-minute sessions, three times a week for four weeks). The responsiveness of the Mini-BESTest was determined using two approaches: 1) the distribution-based method evaluating the change scores (pre- and post-intervention), the effect size (ES), the standard response mean (SRM), the standard error of measurement (SEM) and the minimum detectable change (MDC₉₅) and 2) the anchor-based method evaluating the MIC using the Global Rating of Change scale (GRC) as an external criterion.

Results

After the balance exercises treatment, the Mini-BESTest scores significantly improved (p < 0.001) with an ES of 3.9 and SRM of 4.32. SEM was 0.73 and MDC₉₅ was 2.03 points. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve corresponded to 81%. The cutoff point of the Mini-BESTest was ≥5 points corresponding to the GRC ≤3 versus >3 for the discrimination of the Mini-BESTest between improvement and no improvement after exercises.

Conclusion

The Mini-BESTest can be demonstrated as high responsiveness according to the determination of the distribution-based and the anchor-based methods. The MIC of the Mini-BESTest was taken as ≥5 points and could be used as an outcome measure for the discriminated evaluation of type 2 diabetic patients with peripheral neuropathy.

Reliability and Validity of Mini-Balance Evaluation System Test in Type 2 Diabetic Patients with Peripheral Neuropathy

Type 2 diabetic peripheral neuropathy is known to cause balance limitations in static, dynamic, and functional activity. The Mini-BESTest, a shortened version of BESTest, was evolved to identify balance disorders within a short duration. No prior studies have yet been conducted to assess the usefulness of Mini-BESTest in the diagnosis of type 2 diabetic peripheral neuropathy. The current study aimed to examine the reliability and discriminant validity by comparing the Mini-BESTest scores between type 2 diabetic patients with peripheral neuropathy, divided into two 2 groups based on reporting scores of <4 and ≥4 in the MNSI questionnaire, respectively. Therefore, a cross-sectional study design was conducted including 44 type 2 diabetic patients (4 males and 40 females; aged 56.61 ± 7.7 years old). Diabetic peripheral neuropathy was diagnosed by physical assessment using the Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument (MNSI). Inter-rater (two physiotherapists) and Intra-rater (7−10 days) reliability of the Mini-BESTest were explored with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC2,1) and (ICC3,1). The Mini-BESTest presented an excellent inter-rater reliability (ICC2,1= 0.95, 95% CI = 0.91−0.97, SEM = 0.61) and an excellent intra-rater reliability (ICC3,1 = 0.93, 95% CI = 0.87−0.96, SEM = 0.66), with confirmation by a good agreement presented by the Bland−Altman plots. The internal consistency measured with the overall Cronbach’s alpha showed an acceptable agreement (0.73). The MDC was 2.16. In addition, the Mini-BESTest scores in the type 2 diabetic neuropathy patients reporting MNSI questionnaire scores <4 was found to be significantly higher when compared with those reporting scores ≥4. The Mini-BESTest can be used as a highly reliable and valid clinical application in the population with type 2 diabetic peripheral neuropathy.

Section of the Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest) Cutoff Values for Walking Speed Level in Older Women With Hip Fracture

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Hip fracture is a common injury in older adults, with a high proportion of hip fractures affecting women. After a hip fracture, the recovery of the patient's walking speed is very important; one of the key determinants of walking speed is balance. The Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest), a clinical balance measure, categorizes balance into 6 postural control systems. However, the relationship between the walking speed level and the sections of the BESTest has not been explored for older women with hip fracture. Our objective was to establish section scores for the BESTest cutoff values for walking speed in older women with hip fracture.

METHODS

This was an observational study involving 46 older women 65 years or older with hip fracture. The BESTest was administered to all participants upon their discharge from the hospital. Participants were divided into groups on the basis of their walking speed levels, and receiver operating characteristic curves were determined for each section of the BESTest. We calculated the cutoff value, area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity of each.

RESULTS

Section IV-Stability in Gait showed the highest AUC (0.92) compared with the other sections, and the cutoff value determined for the fast and slow walker groups was 64.3% (sensitivity = 0.82, specificity = 0.83). The sections with moderate AUC (0.7-0.9) were I-Biomechanical Constraints (cutoff = 70.0%), III-Anticipatory Postural Adjustments (cutoff = 66.5%), IV-Postural Responses (cutoff = 69.4%), and V-Sensory Orientation (cutoff = 83.4%). The sections with the highest sensitivity (0.82) were I-Biomechanical Constraints and VI-Stability in Gait, and that with the highest specificity (0.88) was II-Stability Limits and Verticality.

CONCLUSIONS

Five of the BESTest sections (I-Biomechanical Constraints, III-Anticipatory Postural Adjustments, IV-Postural Responses, V-Sensory Orientation, and IV-Stability in Gait) were able to differentiate between fast and slow walkers among older women with hip fracture. Balance during gait and anticipatory postural adjustments were shown to be important components of balance, and their cutoff values were indicators of the balance required to reach fast walking levels.

Psychometric Properties of Brief-Balance Evaluation Systems Test Among Multiple Populations: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To synthesize evidence regarding the psychometric properties of the Brief-Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest) in assessing postural controls across various populations.

DATA SOURCES

Articles were searched in 9 databases from inception to March 2020.

STUDY SELECTION

Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full-text articles to include studies that reported at least 1 psychometric property of the Brief-BESTest. There were no language restrictions.

DATA EXTRACTION

The 2 independent reviewers extracted data (including psychometric properties of Brief-BESTest) from the included studies. The methodological quality of the included studies was appraised by the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Status Measurement Instruments checklist, and the quality of statistical outcomes was assessed by the Terwee et al method. A best-evidence synthesis for each measurement property of the Brief-BESTest in each population was conducted.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Twenty-four studies encompassing 13 populations were included. There was moderate to strong positive evidence to support the internal consistency (Cronbach α>0.82), criterion validity (ρ≥0.73, r≥0.71), and construct validity (ρ≥0.66, r≥0.50, area under curve>0.72) of the Brief-BESTest in different populations. Moderate to strong positive evidence supported the responsiveness of the Brief-BESTest in detecting changes in postural controls of patients 4 weeks after total knee arthroplasty or patients with subacute stroke after 4-week rehabilitation. However, there was strong negative evidence for the structural validity of this scale in patients with various neurologic conditions. The evidence for the reliability of individual items and measurement errors remains unknown.

CONCLUSIONS

The Brief-BESTest is a valid (criterion- and construct-related) tool to assess postural control in multiple populations. However, further studies on the reliability of individual items and minimal clinically important difference of the Brief-BESTest are warranted before recommending it as an alternative to the BESTest and Mini-BESTest in clinical research/practice.

Wearable Focal Muscle Vibration on Pain, Balance, Mobility, and Sensation in Individuals with Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy: A Pilot Study

People with diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) experience a lower quality of life caused by associated pain, loss of sensation and mobility impairment. Current standard care for DPN is limited and lacking. This study explores the benefits of 4-week, in-home wearable focal muscle vibration (FMV) therapy on pain, balance, mobility, and sensation in people with DPN. Participants were randomized into three groups and received different FMV intensities. FMV was applied using a modified Myovolt^TM wearable device to the tibialis anterior, distal quadriceps, and gastrocnemius/soleus muscles on both lower limbs for three days a week over four weeks. The outcomes included pain, balance, mobility, sensation, device usage log, feedback survey, and a semi-structured interview. In all, 23 participants completed the study. The results showed significant improvement in average pain (Pre: 4.00 ± 2.29; Post: 3.18 ± 2.26; p = 0.007), pain interference with walking ability (Pre: 4.14 ± 3.20; Post: 3.09 ± 1.976; p = 0.03), and standard and cognitive Timed Up-and-Go scores (Pre: 13.75 ± 5.34; Post: 12.65 ± 5.25; p = 0.04; Pre: 15.12 ± 6.60; Post: 12.71 ± 5.57; p = 0.003, respectively); the overall pain improvement was trending towards significance (Pre: 3.48 ± 2.56; Post: 2.87 ± 1.85; p = 0.051). Balance and sensations improved but not significantly. There was a trend towards significance (p = 0.088), correlation (r = 0.382) between changes in balance and baseline pain. The participants were highly satisfied with wearable FMV and were 100% compliant. FMV therapy was associated with improved pain, mobility, and sensation. Further study with a larger sample and better outcome measures are warranted.

Reliability and Validity of Turkish Version of The Brief-BESTest in Stroke Patients

BACKGROUND

The Brief-BESTest is the short version of the BESTest used to evaluate balance and fall risk in a multiple disease populations. The clinicians need practical, short application scales to evaluate the risk of falling, balance and rehabilitation results.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to investigate the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Brief-BESTest (Brief-BESTest-T) in stroke patients.

METHODS

This study included a total of 40 subacute and chronic stroke patients (mean age of 60.28 ± 9.96 years). The Brief-BESTest, Berg Balance Scale (BBS), Timed Up and Go Test (TUG), Functional Reach Test (FRT), Falls Efficacy Scale (FES) and 10 m walking test were applied to the patients.

RESULTS

A strong correlation was observed between the1st and 2nd evaluation Brief-BESTest-T total scores (r = 0.933). Cronbach's alpha coefficient was excellent. According to the correlation analysis performed to test the inter-rater reliability, a very high correlation (r = 0.906) was observed between the Brief-BESTest-T total scores. A high correlation was found between the Brief-BESTest-T and BBS and TUG, while a moderate correlation was found between the FRT, FES, and 10 m walking test. The clinical cut-off point for the Brief-BESTest - T was determined to be 9 points with an AUC of 0.872. There were no floor and ceiling effects found.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that the Brief-BESTest-T had excellent internal consistency, intra-rater, and inter-rater reliability. Its concurrent, discriminant, and known-groups validity were also good and had no substantial floor and ceiling effects.

Is the Wii balance board a valid and reliable instrument to assess postural stability in older adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus?

AIMS

Evaluate the validity and reliability of the data from the Wii balance board (WBB), against a force platform (FP) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

Forty-three adults with T2DM (age 62.1 ± 12.1 yrs) in the validity trial and 27 (age 63.5 ± 10.8 yrs) in the reliability study, were tested. Total COP area (mm) and range of antero-posterior (AP) and medio-lateral (ML) COP excursion were collected simultaneously on a FP and a WBB.

RESULTS

Mean CoP sway path values were similar in all conditions in the FP when compared with the WBB. Regression model shows that WBB is able to explain most of the variation in CoP sway path data of the FP (between 42 and 72%) for all testing conditions, indicating that the WBB has good concurrent validity. Test-retest reliability for WBB was excellent, except for the COP sway area in the 'eyes open' condition (ICC = 0.55). Both conditions showed modest to excellent reliability in the AP (0.73-0.90) and the ML (0.77-0.91) directions.

CONCLUSION

The WBB has been shown to be a valid and reliable method to quantify the COP displacement during different balance tests in older adults with T2DM.

Diagnostic test accuracy of an automated device as a screening tool for fall risk assessment in community-residing elderly: A STARD compliant study

We aimed to determine the accuracy and failure of OAK device, an automated screening, for the assessment of fall risk in a prospective cohort of healthy adults aged over 65 years. The algorithm for fall risk assessment of the centers for disease control and prevention (CDC) was used as reference standard. Of the 183 individuals recruited, the CDC algorithm classified 80 as being at moderate/high risk and 103 at low risk of falling. OAK device failure incidence was 4.9% (confidence interval [CI] upper limit 7.7%), below the preset threshold for futility-early termination of the study (i.e., not above 15%). The OAK device showed a sensitivity of 84% and a specificity of 67% (receiver operating characteristic [ROC] area 82%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 76-88%), not reaching the preplanned target sensitivity (not lower than 85%). Diagnostic accuracy was not far from the sensitivity levels similar to those obtained with other fall risk assessment. However, some limitations can be considered.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02655796.

Prediction of falling risk after discharge in ambulatory stroke or history of fracture patients using Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest)

[Purpose] The purpose of this study was to clarify the relationships between falls and sections of the Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest) in patients with stroke or those with a history of fracture. [Subjects and Methods] This longitudinal study included 51 self-ambulatory inpatients. Balance was assessed 1 week prior to discharge using the BESTest, and the incidence of falls within 6 months after discharge was investigated. Relationships between falling and balance components were analyzed using the t-test or the Mann-Whitney U test and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. [Results] Five subjects were dropped out before follow-up at 6 months. Falls were reported by 10 of the remaining 46 participants. Scores for two sections (Anticipatory Postural Adjustments and Sensory Orientation) were significantly lower in fallers than in non-fallers with stroke. Four of the six sections (Biomechanical Constraints, Anticipatory Postural Adjustments, Sensory Orientation, and Stability in Gait) showed areas under the ROC curves >0.8 (0.82, 0.83, 0.84, and 0.81, respectively). In patients with a history of fractures, all sections were not significantly different between fallers and non-fallers. [Conclusion] Anticipatory Postural Adjustments and Sensory Orientation sections of the BESTest were related to future occurrence of fall after discharge in self-ambulatory stroke patients.