IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0221489.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reliability of the balance evaluation systems test and trunk control measurement scale in adult spinal deformity

Author

Listed:
  • Pieter Severijns
  • Thomas Overbergh
  • Lennart Scheys
  • Lieven Moke
  • Kaat Desloovere

Abstract

Objective: To test the reliability of the Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest) and Trunk Control Measurement Scale (TCMS) between sessions and raters in the adult spinal deformity (ASD) population. Summary of background data: Up to now evaluation in ASD was mainly based on static radiographic parameters. Recently literature showed that dynamic balance was a better predictor of health-related quality of life than radiographic parameters, stressing the importance of balance assessment. However, to the best of our knowledge, reliability of balance assessment tools has not yet been investigated in the ASD population. Methods: Twenty ASD patients participated in this study. Ten patients were included in the test-retest study, including repeated measurements. Ten patients were measured once, simultaneously but independently by three raters. Each participant performed two balance scales, namely the BESTest and the TCMS. Statistical analysis consisted of intra class correlations (ICC) on scale- and subscale level, and kappa scores on item-level. Cronbach’s alpha on total scores, standard errors of measurement (SEM), smallest detectable differences and percentages of agreement were also calculated. Bland-altman plots were created to investigate systematic bias. Results: ICC scores between sessions and raters for TCMS (0.76 and 0.88) and BESTest (0.90 and 0.94) total scores were good to excellent. SEM’s between sessions and raters were also low for total scores on TCMS (1.66 and 2.35) and BESTest (2.99 and 2.32). However, on subscale- and item-level reliability decreased and ceiling effects were observed. No systematic bias was observed between sessions and raters. Conclusion: BESTest and TCMS showed to be reliable tools to measure balance in ASD on scale-level. However, on subscale- and item-level reliability decreased and ceiling effects were observed. Therefore, the question arises if there is need for an ASD-specific balance scale.

Suggested Citation

  • Pieter Severijns & Thomas Overbergh & Lennart Scheys & Lieven Moke & Kaat Desloovere, 2019. "Reliability of the balance evaluation systems test and trunk control measurement scale in adult spinal deformity," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(8), pages 1-12, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0221489
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0221489
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0221489
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0221489&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0221489?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0221489. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.