Dataset Information

Concurrent validity and reliability of the Community Balance and Mobility scale in young-older adults.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:With the growing number of young-older adults (baby-boomers), there is an increasing demand for assessment tools specific for this population, which are able to detect subtle balance and mobility deficits. Various balance and mobility tests already exist, but suffer from ceiling effects in higher functioning older adults. A reliable and valid challenging balance and mobility test is critical to determine a young-older adult's balance and mobility performance and to timely initiate preventive interventions. The aim was to evaluate the concurrent validity, inter- and intrarater reliability, internal consistency, and ceiling effects of a challenging balance and mobility scale, the Community Balance and Mobility Scale (CBM), in young-older adults aged 60 to 70 years. METHODS:Fifty-one participants aged 66.4?±?2.7 years (range, 60-70 years) were assessed with the CBM. The Fullerton Advanced Balance scale (FAB), 3-Meter Tandem Walk (3MTW), 8-level balance scale, Timed-Up-and-Go (TUG), and 7-m habitual gait speed were used to estimate concurrent validity, examined by Spearman correlation coefficient (?). Inter- and intrarater reliability were calculated as Intra-class-correlations (ICC), and internal consistency by Cronbach alpha and item-total correlations (?). Ceiling effects were determined by obtaining the percentage of participants reaching the highest possible score. RESULTS:The CBM significantly correlated with the FAB (??=?0.75; p?

SUBMITTER: Weber M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6031142 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Concurrent validity and reliability of the Community Balance and Mobility scale in young-older adults.

Weber Michaela M Van Ancum Jeanine J Bergquist Ronny R Taraldsen Kristin K Gordt Katharina K Mikolaizak A Stefanie AS Nerz Corinna C Pijnappels Mirjam M Jonkman Nini H NH Maier Andrea B AB Helbostad Jorunn L JL Vereijken Beatrix B Becker Clemens C Schwenk Michael M

BMC geriatrics 20180703 1

<h4>Background</h4>With the growing number of young-older adults (baby-boomers), there is an increasing demand for assessment tools specific for this population, which are able to detect subtle balance and mobility deficits. Various balance and mobility tests already exist, but suffer from ceiling effects in higher functioning older adults. A reliable and valid challenging balance and mobility test is critical to determine a young-older adult's balance and mobility performance and to timely init ...[more]

PMID: 29970010

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:New reliable devices for range of motion (ROM) measures in older adults are necessary to improve knowledge about the functional capability in this population. Dorsiflexion ROM limitation is associated with ankle injuries, foot pain, lower limb disorders, loss of balance, gait control disorders and fall risk in older adults. The aim of the present study was to assess the validity and reliability of the Leg Motion device for measuring ankle dorsiflexion ROM in older adults. METHODS:Adescriptive repeated-measures study was designed to test the reliability of Leg Motion in thirty-three healthy elderly patients older than 65 years. The subjects had to meet the following inclusion and exclusion criteria in their medical records: older than 65 years; no lower extremity injury for at least one year prior to evaluation (meniscopathy, or fractures) and any chronic injuries (e.g., osteoarthritis); no previous hip, knee or ankle surgery; no neuropathic alterations and no cognitive conditions (e.g., Alzheimer's disease or dementia). Participants were recruited through the person responsible for the physiotherapist area from a nursing center. The subjects were evaluated in two different sessions at the same time of day, and there was a break of two weeks between sessions. To test the validity of the Leg Motion system, the participants were measured in a weight-bearing lunge position using a classic goniometer with 1° increments, a smartphone with an inclinometer standard app (iPhone 5S®) with 1° increments and a measuring tape that could measure 0.1 cm. All testing was performed while the patients were barefoot. The researcher had ten years of experience as a physiotherapist using goniometer, tape measure and inclinometer devices. RESULTS:Mean values and standard deviations were as follows: Leg Motion (right 5.15 ± 3.08; left 5.19 ± 2.98), tape measure (right 5.12 ± 3.08; left 5.12 ± 2.80), goniometer (right 45.87° ± 4.98; left 44.50° ± 5.54) and inclinometer app (right 46.53° ± 4.79; left 45.27° ± 5.19). The paired t-test showed no significant differences between the limbs or between the test and re-test values. The test re-test reliability results for Leg Motion were as follows: the standard error of the measurement ranged from 0.29 to 0.43 cm, the minimal detectable difference ranged from 0.79 to 1.19 cm, and the intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) values ranged from 0.97 to 0.98. CONCLUSIONS:The results of the present study indicated that the Leg Motion device is a valid, reliable, accessible and portable tool as an alternative to the classic weight-bearing lunge test for measuring ankle dorsiflexion ROM in older adults.

Project description:BackgroundPrevious questionnaires targeting older adults' sedentary time have underestimated total sedentary time, possibly by not including all relevant specific sedentary behaviors. The current study aimed to investigate the criterion validity and test-retest reliability of a new questionnaire assessing a comprehensive set of sedentary behaviors. Additionally, we examined whether the criterion validity of the questionnaire differed according to age, gender and educational level.MethodsA sample of home-dwelling Belgian older adults (>64 years, n?=?508) completed a newly-developed questionnaire assessing twelve specific sedentary behaviors and wore an accelerometer for seven consecutive days as criterion measure. A subsample (n?=?28) completed the questionnaire a second time to examine test-retest reliability. Data collection occurred between September 2010 and October 2012.ResultsCorrelational analyses examining self-reported total sitting time and accelerometer-derived sedentary time yielded a Spearman's ? of 0.30. Using the Bland-Altman regression procedure, self-reported total sitting time underestimated accelerometer-derived sedentary time by -82 minutes/day for a participant with an average level of sedentary time (539 minutes/day). Corresponding 95% limits of agreement were wide (-364, 200 minutes/day). Better, but still not ideal, validity findings were observed in the younger, male and tertiary-educated subgroups. Acceptable test-retest reliability (ICC?>?0.70) was found for total sitting time, TV viewing, computer use, and driving a car.ConclusionValidity for older adults' self-reported total sitting time against accelerometer-derived sedentary time was not strong, but comparable to previous studies. However, underestimation of total sedentary time was lower compared to previous studies, possibly explained by the inclusion of additional specific sedentary behaviors. Further research is needed to develop self-report tools and objective criterion measures that accurately measure engagement in (specific) sedentary behavior(s) among different subgroups of the older population.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Balance performance is considered as an indicator of functional status in the elderly, a large scale population screening and evaluation in the community context followed by proper interventions would be of great significance at public health level. However, there has been no suitable balance testing scale available for large scale studies in the unique community context of urban China. METHODS:A balance scale named X16 balance testing scale was developed, which was composed of 3 domains and 16 items. A total of 1985 functionally independent and active community-dwelling elderly adults' balance abilities were tested using the X16 scale. The internal consistency, split-half reliability, content validity, construct validity, discriminant validity of X16 balance testing scale were evaluated. RESULTS:Factor analysis was performed to identify alternative factor structure. The Eigenvalues of factors 1, 2, and 3 were 8.53, 1.79, and 1.21, respectively, and their cumulative contribution to the total variance reached 72.0%. These 3 factors mainly represented domains static balance, postural stability, and dynamic balance. The Cronbach alpha coefficient for the scale was 0.933. The Spearman correlation coefficients between items and its corresponding domains were ranged from 0.538 to 0.964. The correlation coefficients between each item and its corresponding domain were higher than the coefficients between this item and other domains. With the increase of age, the scores of balance performance, domains static balance, postural stability, and dynamic balance in the elderly declined gradually (P?<?0.001). With the increase of age, the proportion of the elderly with intact balance performance decreased gradually (P?< 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:The reliability and validity of the X16 balance testing scale is both adequate and acceptable. Due to its simple and quick use features, it is practical to be used repeatedly and routinely especially in community setting and on large scale screening.

Dataset Information

Concurrent validity and reliability of the Community Balance and Mobility scale in young-older adults.

Publications

Concurrent validity and reliability of the Community Balance and Mobility scale in young-older adults.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets