Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ir.swu.ac.th/jspui/handle/123456789/12587
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorWinairuk T.
dc.contributor.authorPang M.Y.C.
dc.contributor.authorSaengsirisuwan V.
dc.contributor.authorHorak F.B.
dc.contributor.authorBoonsinsukh R.
dc.date.accessioned2021-04-05T03:04:18Z-
dc.date.available2021-04-05T03:04:18Z-
dc.date.issued2019
dc.identifier.issn16501977
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-85072943456
dc.identifier.urihttps://ir.swu.ac.th/jspui/handle/123456789/12587-
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85072943456&doi=10.2340%2f16501977-2589&partnerID=40&md5=81ec35ec239e7070300a897f45e0becf
dc.description.abstractObjectives: 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. © 2019 Foundation of Rehabilitation Information.
dc.subjectbody equilibrium
dc.subjectcerebrovascular accident
dc.subjectdisability
dc.subjectfemale
dc.subjecthuman
dc.subjectmale
dc.subjectmiddle aged
dc.subjectpathology
dc.subjectphysiology
dc.subjectphysiotherapy
dc.subjectprospective study
dc.subjectreproducibility
dc.subjectDisability Evaluation
dc.subjectFemale
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectMale
dc.subjectMiddle Aged
dc.subjectPhysical Therapy Modalities
dc.subjectPostural Balance
dc.subjectProspective Studies
dc.subjectReproducibility of Results
dc.subjectStroke
dc.titleComparison of measurement properties of three shortened versions of the balance evaluation system test (BESTest) in people with subacute stroke
dc.typeArticle
dc.rights.holderScopus
dc.identifier.bibliograpycitationJournal of Rehabilitation Medicine. Vol 51, No.9 (2019), p.683-691
dc.identifier.doi10.2340/16501977-2589
Appears in Collections:Scopus 1983-2021

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in SWU repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.