Cargando…

WHICH BALANCE EVALUATION SYSTEMS TEST SECTIONS BEST DISTINGUISH LEVELS OF POST-STROKE FUNCTIONAL WALKING STATUS?

OBJECTIVE: To determine which sections of the Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest) distinguish levels of post-stroke functional walking status and to establish their cut-off scores. DESIGN: A retrospective cross-sectional study. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The BESTest was administered to 87 stroke pa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: MIYATA, Kazuhiro, HASEGAWA, Satoshi, IWAMOTO, Hiroki, OTANI, Tomohiro, KAIZU, Yoichi, SHINOHARA, Tomoyuki, USUDA, Shigeru
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Foundation for Rehabilitation Information 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8638744/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34486068
http://dx.doi.org/10.2340/16501977-2870
_version_ 1784609001263071232
author MIYATA, Kazuhiro
HASEGAWA, Satoshi
IWAMOTO, Hiroki
OTANI, Tomohiro
KAIZU, Yoichi
SHINOHARA, Tomoyuki
USUDA, Shigeru
author_facet MIYATA, Kazuhiro
HASEGAWA, Satoshi
IWAMOTO, Hiroki
OTANI, Tomohiro
KAIZU, Yoichi
SHINOHARA, Tomoyuki
USUDA, Shigeru
author_sort MIYATA, Kazuhiro
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To determine which sections of the Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest) distinguish levels of post-stroke functional walking status and to establish their cut-off scores. DESIGN: A retrospective cross-sectional study. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The BESTest was administered to 87 stroke patients who were able to walk without physical assistance upon discharge from the hospital. Subjects were divided into 3 functional walking status groups: namely, household ambulators, limited community ambulators, and unlimited community ambulators. The receiver operating characteristic curve was determined and the cut-off score and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of each section calculated. RESULTS: In the comparison of household and limited community ambulators, the accuracies of all BESTest sections were moderate (AUROC>0.7), and the cut-off scores were 36.1–78.6%. In the comparison of limited and unlimited community ambulators, one section (stability in gait) had high accuracy (AUROC=0.908, cut-off scores=73.8%) and 3 sections (biomechanical constraints, anticipatory postural adjustments, and postural response) had moderate accuracy (AUROC=0.812–0.834, cut-off scores=75.0–83.4%). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that different sections of the BESTest had different abilities to discriminate levels of post-stroke functional walking status, and identified cut-off values for targeted improvement.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8638744
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Foundation for Rehabilitation Information
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86387442022-02-08 WHICH BALANCE EVALUATION SYSTEMS TEST SECTIONS BEST DISTINGUISH LEVELS OF POST-STROKE FUNCTIONAL WALKING STATUS? MIYATA, Kazuhiro HASEGAWA, Satoshi IWAMOTO, Hiroki OTANI, Tomohiro KAIZU, Yoichi SHINOHARA, Tomoyuki USUDA, Shigeru J Rehabil Med Original Report OBJECTIVE: To determine which sections of the Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest) distinguish levels of post-stroke functional walking status and to establish their cut-off scores. DESIGN: A retrospective cross-sectional study. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The BESTest was administered to 87 stroke patients who were able to walk without physical assistance upon discharge from the hospital. Subjects were divided into 3 functional walking status groups: namely, household ambulators, limited community ambulators, and unlimited community ambulators. The receiver operating characteristic curve was determined and the cut-off score and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of each section calculated. RESULTS: In the comparison of household and limited community ambulators, the accuracies of all BESTest sections were moderate (AUROC>0.7), and the cut-off scores were 36.1–78.6%. In the comparison of limited and unlimited community ambulators, one section (stability in gait) had high accuracy (AUROC=0.908, cut-off scores=73.8%) and 3 sections (biomechanical constraints, anticipatory postural adjustments, and postural response) had moderate accuracy (AUROC=0.812–0.834, cut-off scores=75.0–83.4%). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that different sections of the BESTest had different abilities to discriminate levels of post-stroke functional walking status, and identified cut-off values for targeted improvement. Foundation for Rehabilitation Information 2021-09-06 /pmc/articles/PMC8638744/ /pubmed/34486068 http://dx.doi.org/10.2340/16501977-2870 Text en © 2021 Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Report
MIYATA, Kazuhiro
HASEGAWA, Satoshi
IWAMOTO, Hiroki
OTANI, Tomohiro
KAIZU, Yoichi
SHINOHARA, Tomoyuki
USUDA, Shigeru
WHICH BALANCE EVALUATION SYSTEMS TEST SECTIONS BEST DISTINGUISH LEVELS OF POST-STROKE FUNCTIONAL WALKING STATUS?
title WHICH BALANCE EVALUATION SYSTEMS TEST SECTIONS BEST DISTINGUISH LEVELS OF POST-STROKE FUNCTIONAL WALKING STATUS?
title_full WHICH BALANCE EVALUATION SYSTEMS TEST SECTIONS BEST DISTINGUISH LEVELS OF POST-STROKE FUNCTIONAL WALKING STATUS?
title_fullStr WHICH BALANCE EVALUATION SYSTEMS TEST SECTIONS BEST DISTINGUISH LEVELS OF POST-STROKE FUNCTIONAL WALKING STATUS?
title_full_unstemmed WHICH BALANCE EVALUATION SYSTEMS TEST SECTIONS BEST DISTINGUISH LEVELS OF POST-STROKE FUNCTIONAL WALKING STATUS?
title_short WHICH BALANCE EVALUATION SYSTEMS TEST SECTIONS BEST DISTINGUISH LEVELS OF POST-STROKE FUNCTIONAL WALKING STATUS?
title_sort which balance evaluation systems test sections best distinguish levels of post-stroke functional walking status?
topic Original Report
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8638744/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34486068
http://dx.doi.org/10.2340/16501977-2870
work_keys_str_mv AT miyatakazuhiro whichbalanceevaluationsystemstestsectionsbestdistinguishlevelsofpoststrokefunctionalwalkingstatus
AT hasegawasatoshi whichbalanceevaluationsystemstestsectionsbestdistinguishlevelsofpoststrokefunctionalwalkingstatus
AT iwamotohiroki whichbalanceevaluationsystemstestsectionsbestdistinguishlevelsofpoststrokefunctionalwalkingstatus
AT otanitomohiro whichbalanceevaluationsystemstestsectionsbestdistinguishlevelsofpoststrokefunctionalwalkingstatus
AT kaizuyoichi whichbalanceevaluationsystemstestsectionsbestdistinguishlevelsofpoststrokefunctionalwalkingstatus
AT shinoharatomoyuki whichbalanceevaluationsystemstestsectionsbestdistinguishlevelsofpoststrokefunctionalwalkingstatus
AT usudashigeru whichbalanceevaluationsystemstestsectionsbestdistinguishlevelsofpoststrokefunctionalwalkingstatus