The minimal clinically important difference of the mini-balance evaluation systems test in patients with early subacute stroke

References

• Thorpe ER, Garrett KB, Smith AM, Reneker JC, Phillips RS. Outcome measure scores predict discharge destination in patients with acute and subacute stroke: a systematic review and series of meta-analyses. J Neurol Phys Ther. 2018;42:2–11.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pinto Zipp G, Sullivan JE, Rose DK, et al. Academy of neurologic physical therapy. Outcome measures recommendations. StrokEDGE Taskforce recommendations. 2011. https://www.neuropt.org/docs/default-source/stroke-sig/strokeedge_taskforce_summary_document.pdf?sfvrsn=b80e4d80_2. Accessed December 7, 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Franchignoni F, Horak F, Godi M, Nardone A, Giordano A. Using psychometric techniques to improve the balance evaluation systems test: the Mini-BESTest. J Rehabil Med. 2010;42:323–331.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winairuk T, Pang MYC, Saengsirisuwan V, Horak FB, Boonsinsukh R. Comparison of measurement properties of three shortened versions of the balance evaluation system test (BESTest) in people with subacute stroke. J Rehabil Med. 2019;51:683–691.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dominguez-Olivan P, Gasch-Gallen A, Aguas-Garcia E, Bengoetxea A. Validity and reliability testing of the Spanish version of the BESTest and mini-BESTest in healthy community-dwelling elderly. BMC Geriatr. 2020;20:444.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leddy AL, Crowner BE, Earhart GM. Utility of the Mini-BESTest, BESTest, and BESTest sections for balance assessments in individuals with Parkinson disease. J Neurol Phys Ther. 2011;35:90–97.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oyama C, Otaka Y, Onitsuka K, Takagi H, Tan E, Otaka E. Reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the mini-balance evaluation systems test in patients with subacute stroke. Prog Rehabil Med. 2018;3:20180015.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hasegawa S, Matsui T, Kishi M, et al. Sensitivity to change and responsiveness of the balance evaluation systems test (BESTest), Mini-BESTest, and Brief-BESTest in patients with subacute cerebral infarction. J Phys Ther Sci. 2021;33:69–74. doi:10.1589/jpts.33.69.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sibley KM, Howe T, Lamb SE, et al. Recommendations for a core outcome set for measuring standing balance in adult populations: a consensus-based approach. PLOS ONE. 2015;10:e0120568. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0120568.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amsterdam Public Health [Internet]. Amsterdam: consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments (COSMIN). http://www.cosmin.nl. Accessed December 7, 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Revicki D, Hays RD, Cella D, Sloan J. Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61:102–109. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.03.012.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernhardt J, Hayward KS, Kwakkel G, et al. Agreed definitions and a shared vision for new standards in stroke recovery research: the stroke recovery and rehabilitation roundtable taskforce. Int J Stroke. 2017;12:444–450.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Godi M, Franchignoni F, Caligari M, Giordano A, Turcato AM, Nardone A. Comparison of reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the mini-BESTest and Berg Balance Scale in patients with balance disorders. Phys Ther. 2013;93:158–167.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teasell R, Foley N, Salter K, Zettler L, Kruger E. 50 of the most important clinical studies in stroke rehabilitation. In: Evidence-Based Review of Stroke Rehabilitation. 11th (CANADA: Canadian Partnership for Stroke Recovery)1–34 . 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP. The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Arch Intern Med. 2007;147:573–577.
   Google Scholar
• Horak FB. Balance evaluation systems test. 2019c. [Accessed May 6, 2022]. Available from: http://www.bestest.us.
   Google Scholar
• Kamper SJ, Maher CG, Mackay G. Global rating of change scales: a review of strengths and weaknesses and considerations for design. J Man Manip Ther. 2009;17:163–170.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lauridsen HH, Hartvigsen J, Korsholm L, Grunnet-Nilsson N, Manniche C. Choice of external criteria in back pain research: does it matter? Recommendations based on analysis of responsiveness. Pain. 2007;131:112–120.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franchignoni F, Traballesi M, Monticone M, Giordano A, Brunelli S, Ferriero G. Sensitivity to change and minimal clinically important difference of the locomotor capabilities index-5 in people with lower limb amputation undergoing prosthetic training. Ann Phys Rehabil Med. 2019;62:137–141.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mouelhi Y, Jouve E, Castelli C, Gentile S. How is the minimal clinically important difference established in health-related quality of life instruments? Review of anchors and methods. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2020;18:136.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60:34–42. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Portney LG, Watkins MP. Foundations of Clinical Research: Applications to Practice. USA: Pearson/Prentice Hall; 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Beauchamp MK, Niebuhr R, Roche P, Kirkwood R, Sibley KM. A prospective study to establish the minimal clinically important difference of the Mini-BESTest in individuals with stroke. Clin Rehabil. 2021;35:1207–1215.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chinsongkram B, Chaikeeree N, Saengsirisuwan V, Horak FB, Boonsinsukh R. Responsiveness of the balance evaluation systems test (BESTest) in people with subacute stroke. Phys Ther. 2016;96:1638–1647.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osoba D. The clinical value and meaning of health-related quality-of-life outcomes in oncology. In: Lipscomb J, Gotay C, Snyder C, eds. Outcomes Assessment in Cancer: Measures, Methods and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2005:386–405. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511545856.019.
   Google Scholar
• Beninato M, Fernandes A, Plummer LS. Minimal clinically important difference of the functional gait assessment in older adults. Phys Ther. 2014;94:1594–1603.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar