Psychometric Properties of Brief-Balance Evaluation Systems Test Among Multiple Populations: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong SAR, China;2. Institute of Allied Health Sciences, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan;3. Department of Physiotherapy, School of Nursing and Health Studies, The Open University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China;4. Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China;1. Institute for Social Medicine and Epidemiology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck;2. Federal German Pension Insurance, Berlin, Germany;1. Department of Occupational Therapy, School of Health Professions, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama;2. School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama;3. Department of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham;1. Center for Health Assessment Research and Translation, College of Health Sciences, University of Delaware, Newark, DE;2. Department of Health Law, Policy, and Management, School of Public Health, Boston University, Boston, MA;3. Departments of Physical Therapy and Psychological & Brain Sciences, University of Delaware, Newark, DE;1. Life Expectancy Project, San Francisco, CA;2. Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN;3. Craig Hospital, Englewood, CO;4. Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Colorado, Denver, CO |
| |
| Abstract: | ObjectiveTo synthesize evidence regarding the psychometric properties of the Brief-Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest) in assessing postural controls across various populations.Data SourcesArticles were searched in 9 databases from inception to March 2020.Study SelectionTwo 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 ExtractionThe 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 SynthesisTwenty-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.ConclusionsThe 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. |
| |
| Keywords: | Postural balance Reproducibility of findings Risk assessment |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
