Comparison of the Test-Retest Reliability of the Balance Computerized Adaptive Test and a Computerized Posturography Instrument in Patients With Stroke

Objective

To compare the test-retest reliabilities of the scores of the Balance Computerized Adaptive Test (CAT) and the Biodex Balance System in patients with stroke.

Design

A repeated-measures design (at a 1-wk interval) was used to examine the test-retest reliabilities of the scores of the Balance CAT and the Biodex Balance System.

Setting

One rehabilitation unit in a local hospital.

Participants

Patients (N=50) with stroke for more than 6 months and undergoing outpatient rehabilitation completed the Balance CAT and the eyes open (EO)/closed (EC) tests, but only 17 patients finished the Limit of Stability (LOS) test because they were unable to reach all the targets.

Interventions

Not applicable.

Main Outcome Measures

The Balance CAT and 2 computerized tests of the Biodex Balance System, namely the EO/EC test and the LOS, were used to evaluate balance function.

Results

The test-retest reliabilities of the scores of the Balance CAT (Pearson r=.92, minimal detectable change [MDC] percent=12.8%) was excellent. Those of the EO/EC and LOS tests were poor to good (Pearson r=.56–.85, MDC%=50.8%–126.9%).

Conclusions

The test-retest reliabilities of the scores of the Balance CAT were sufficient for assessing balance function in patients with stroke. Moreover, the test-retest reliabilities of the scores of the Balance CAT, one of the functional balance measures, were superior to those of the Biodex Balance System, 1 type of computerized posturography instrument. Therefore, the Balance CAT may be a more reliable measure for clinicians and researchers to use in assessing the balance function of patients with stroke for more than 6 months.