Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorHamre, Charlotta
dc.contributor.authorBotolfsen, Pernille
dc.contributor.authorTangen, Gro Gujord
dc.contributor.authorHelbostad, Jorunn L.
dc.date.accessioned2018-01-04T10:31:09Z
dc.date.available2018-01-04T10:31:09Z
dc.date.created2017-04-24T13:55:43Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.identifier.citationBMC Geriatrics. 2017, 17 (92), 1-8.nb_NO
dc.identifier.issn1471-2318
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11250/2475566
dc.description.abstractBackground The Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest) was developed to assess underlying systems for balance control in order to be able to individually tailor rehabilitation interventions to people with balance disorders. A short form, the Mini-BESTest, was developed as a screening test. The study aimed to assess interrater and test-retest reliability of the Norwegian version of the BESTest and the Mini-BESTest in community-dwelling people with increased risk of falling and to assess concurrent validity with the Fall Efficacy Scale-International (FES-I), and it was an observational study with a cross-sectional design. Methods Forty-two persons with increased risk of falling (elderly over 65 years of age, persons with a history of stroke or Multiple Sclerosis) were assessed twice by two raters. Relative reliability was analysed with Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC), and absolute reliability with standard error of measurement (SEM) and smallest detectable change (SDC). Concurrent validity was assessed against the FES-I using Spearman’s rho. Results The BESTest showed very good interrater reliability (ICC = 0.98, SEM = 1.79, SDC95 = 5.0) and test-retest reliability (rater A/rater B = ICC = 0.89/0.89, SEM = 3.9/4.3, SDC95 = 10.8/11.8). The Mini-BESTest also showed very good interrater reliability (ICC = 0.95, SEM = 1.19, SDC95 = 3.3) and test-retest reliability (rater A/rater B = ICC = 0.85/0.84, SEM = 1.8/1.9, SDC95 = 4.9/5.2). The correlations were moderate between the FES-I and both the BESTest and the Mini-BESTest (Spearman’s rho −0.51 and-0.50, p < 0.01). Conclusion The BESTest and its short form, the Mini-BESTest, showed very good interrater and test-retest reliability when assessed in a heterogeneous sample of people with increased risk of falling. The concurrent validity measured against the FES-I showed moderate correlation. The results are comparable with earlier studies and indicate that the Norwegian versions can be used in daily clinic and in research.nb_NO
dc.language.isoengnb_NO
dc.publisherBioMed Centralnb_NO
dc.rightsNavngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.no*
dc.titleInterrater and test-retest reliability and validity of the Norwegian version of the BESTest and mini-BESTest in people with increased risk of fallingnb_NO
dc.typeJournal articlenb_NO
dc.typePeer reviewednb_NO
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionnb_NO
dc.source.pagenumber1-8nb_NO
dc.source.volume17nb_NO
dc.source.journalBMC Geriatricsnb_NO
dc.source.issue92nb_NO
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12877-017-0480-x
dc.identifier.cristin1466234
dc.description.localcode© The Author(s). 2017 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were madenb_NO
cristin.unitcode194,65,30,0
cristin.unitnameInstitutt for nevromedisin og bevegelsesvitenskap
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal