Search

Objectives The Mini- BESTest consists of items relevant to balance deficiencies among people with Parkinson's disease (Pw PD). However, the Mini- BESTest's construct validity has been sparsely evaluated in this population. We therefore aimed to investigate the hypotheses that the Mini- BESTest results would be worse among: (i) Pw PD compared to healthy controls; (ii) Pw PD with moderate compared to mild motor severity; (iii) Pw PD with a history of recurrent compared to non-recurrent falls. Moreover, the relationship between the Mini- BESTest and tests of similar and different constructs was expected to be moderate to strong and poor, respectively. Materials and methods One hundred and five Pw PD with mild-to-moderate motor severity and 47 healthy controls were included. Pw PD were divided into subgroups based on motor severity and fall history. Main outcome measures were the Mini- BESTest, the timed up and go ( TUG), and the original Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale, part II (Activities of Daily Living). Independent t-tests and Spearman's rho were used for the analyses. Results The Mini- BESTest results were worse among Pw PD compared to controls ( P<.001), and among people with moderate motor severity compared to those with mild severity ( P<.001). However, no differences were found between recurrent and non-recurrent fallers ( P=.096). Spearman's rho showed moderate (ρ=−.470) and poor correlations (ρ=−.211) for convergent ( TUG) and divergent validity ( UPDRS, part II), respectively. Conclusions Overall, the Mini- BESTest appears to adequately measure dynamic balance among Pw PD with mild-to-moderate severity, although it was unable to distinguish between recurrent and non-recurrent fallers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]