Peer-Reviewed Journal Details
Mandatory Fields
Ross, E,Purtill, H,Coote, S
2016
December
International Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation
Inter-rater reliability of mini balance evaluation system test in ambulatory people with multiple sclerosis
Published
()
Optional Fields
Balance Measurement Multiple sclerosis Postural control Reliability POSTURAL CONTROL BESTEST DISABILITY AGREEMENT RESPONSIVENESS INDIVIDUALS IMPAIRMENTS DISORDERS IMBALANCE VALIDITY
23
583
589
Background: Balance deficits are common in people with multiple sclerosis, and accurate measurement of balance using clinical measures is important. This study investigates the inter-rater reliability of the mini Balance Evaluation System test (mini-BESTest) in ambulatory people with multiple sclerosis.Methods: People with multiple sclerosis attending physiotherapy in an acute hospital were invited to take part. Participants gave demographic information and completed the mini-BESTest twice. Raters were experienced and novice physiotherapists. Data were analysed using intraclass correlation coefficients and Bland and Altman analysis. Agreement of individual items were analysed using weighted Kappa.Results: Fifty participants (37 female) had a mean age of 45.73 (5.65) years; 61.5% did not use a walking aid. The mean difference between the raters was 0.27 (Standard deviation: 1.8; 95% confidence interval (CI): -2.5+2.02), which was not significantly different (P= 0.816). The intra class correlation coefficient was 0.98 (95% CI: 0.96-0.99). The standard error of the measures was 1.27, with a minimum detectable change of 3.91. Most items (2-4, 7-10, 12-14) on the mini-BESTest had Kappa values greater than 0.51; item 14 demonstrated complete agreement (k= 1). Percentage agreement for individual questions ranged from 69% to 100%.Conclusions: Agreement between raters was high for the total score and for the majority of individual items. A change greater than 3.9 points on the mini-BESTest is required to be confident that change is not due to measurement error when two raters are used.
10.12968/ijtr.2016.23.12.583
Grant Details