Search

Introduction: Balance screening has been identified as a major predictor of falls in the elderly. The current study compares the diagnostic accuracy of various balance instruments in community-dwelling older adults. Materials and Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 145 older adults were recruited. The Berg balance scale (BBS), Fullerton advanced balance (FAB) scale, dynamic gait index (DGI), performance-oriented mobility assessment (POMA), timed up and go (TUG) test, gait speed, step length, step test, and single item question were administered. The receiver operating characteristics curve analysis was used to calculate diagnostic accuracy. Results: All single-item tools had moderate diagnostic accuracy (area under the curve [AUC]=0.76-0.89) and all multi-item tools had high diagnostic accuracy (AUC=0.91-0.95) when using the recommended cut-off point of 45 for BBS. All multi-item tools maintained high to moderate diagnostic accuracy (AUC=0.85-1.00) in all thresholds while using BBS severity cut-off points. The FAB scale showed the highest diagnostic accuracy (AUC=0.95) among all assessment tools. Single-item question scores (Wald=22.61, df=1, P=0.0001, Exp(B)=8.82) were significant as covariates in the regression model. Conclusion: For older adults with or without a history of falling, the FAB scale demonstrated the highest diagnostic accuracy. Along with single-item tools, the FAB scale may be a preferred multi-item tool.

Introduction: Falling is a common problem after stroke that occurs following the physical and psychological problems. Psychological factors such as reduce of self-efficacy in maintain balance could have an equal or even greater contribution than physical problems in falling. Therefore, having a suitable tool with acceptable repeatability seems to be necessary for evaluation of individual confidence in balance in prevention and rehabilitation programs. The aim of this study is Persian translation and investigation of the test-retest reliability of the Persian version of Activities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) scale in chronic stroke. Material and Methods: The translation was done according to International Quality of Life Assessment procedure. Then, the Persian version of the ABC scale evaluated twice with 1 week interval by an expert occupational therapist on 62 patients with chronic stroke in Tehran city. The reliability if the scale was determined by internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha coefficients); and test-retest reliability (Intraclass correlation coefficient, Pearson coefficient, standard errors of measurement; and minimum detectable change). Results: Content face validity of the Persian version for all questions of this scale showed good to excellent. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.97 in the first and second evaluation which indicates the excellent the internal consistency of this scale. The relative reliability total score of the scale was very excellent (0.97) in test-retest. Standard errors of measurement with 68% confidence were obtained 0.96 which is excellent. Furthermore, Pearson coefficient was in range of 0.86-0.97 in the investigation of the test-retest agreement for each item. Minimum detectable change was calculated 2.66. Conclusion: The result of this study indicated that the Persian version of the ABC scale has excellent test-retest reliability in Iranian chronic stroke and its minimum detectable change is acceptable.

Introduction: The following study was carried out in order to translate, cultural adaptation, and determine the content and face validity of the “Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation” questionnaire with the aim of evaluating the two components of pain and disability in patients with wrist injuries. Material and Methods: The methodology of this survey was non-experimental study. After translation and cultural adaptation according to the Beaton method (approved by the American Surgeon Association), the pilot test was performed on patients with wrist injuries (fractures of the distal radius, scaphoid fractures and carpal tunnel syndrome). To assess content and face validity, the questionnaire was given to 10 specialists (6 of whom were occupational therapists, 2 were physiotherapists, and 2 were orthopaedic surgeons), and 20 patients with wrist injuries. Results: The qualitative content and face validity of the questionnaire for wrist injuries was appropriately reported good. Each item of the content validity ratio was slightly higher than 0.75 and this justified the necessity to include all items. Each item of the content validity index was slightly higher than 0.79. Therefore, all the items were approved in terms of their simplicity, clarity, and relevance. The impact score in order to evaluate the importance of each item was calculated and all were higher than 1.5. Therefore, in terms of face validity all the items were approved. Conclusion: The results showed that the Persian version of the “Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation” questionnaire for evaluating the pain and disability of wrist injuries was indeed satisfactory, in terms of it’s content and face validity, thus it can be used in patients by specialists and therapists.