Venkataraman Kavita, Morgan Michelle, Amis Kristopher A, Landerman Lawrence R, Koh Gerald C, Caves Kevin, Hoenig Helen
Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore.
Center on Aging, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2017 Apr;98(4):659-664.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2016.10.019. Epub 2016 Nov 25.
To compare Berg Balance Scale (BBS) rating using videos with differing transmission characteristics with direct in-person rating.
Repeated-measures study for the assessment of the BBS in 8 configurations: in person, high-definition video with slow motion review, standard-definition videos with varying bandwidths and frame rates (768 kilobytes per second [kbps] videos at 8, 15, and 30 frames per second [fps], 30 fps videos at 128, 384, and 768 kbps).
Medical center.
Patients with limitations (N=45) in ≥1 of 3 specific aspects of motor function: fine motor coordination, gross motor coordination, and gait and balance.
Not applicable.
Ability to rate the BBS in person and using videos with differing bandwidths and frame rates in frontal and lateral views.
Compared with in-person rating (7%), 18% (P=.29) of high-definition videos and 37% (P=.03) of standard-definition videos could not be rated. Interrater reliability for the high-definition videos was .96 (95% confidence interval, .94-.97). Rating failure proportions increased from 20% in videos with the highest bandwidth to 60% (P<.001) in videos with the lowest bandwidth, with no significant differences in proportions across frame rate categories. Both frontal and lateral views were critical for successful rating using videos, with 60% to 70% (P<.001) of videos unable to be rated on a single view.
Although there is some loss of information when using videos to rate the BBS compared to in-person ratings, it is feasible to reliably rate the BBS remotely in standard clinical spaces. However, optimal video rating requires frontal and lateral views for each assessment, high-definition video with high bandwidth, and the ability to carry out slow motion review.
比较使用具有不同传输特性的视频进行伯格平衡量表（BBS）评分与直接面对面评分的差异。
重复测量研究，在8种配置下评估BBS：面对面、可慢动作回看的高清视频、具有不同带宽和帧率的标清视频（每秒8帧、15帧和30帧的768千字节每秒[kbps]视频，每秒30帧的128、384和768 kbps视频）。
医疗中心。
在运动功能3个特定方面中至少1个方面存在限制（N = 45）的患者：精细运动协调、粗大运动协调以及步态和平衡。
不适用。
在正面和侧面视图中面对面以及使用具有不同带宽和帧率的视频对BBS进行评分的能力。
与面对面评分（7%）相比，18%（P = 0.29）的高清视频和37%（P = 0.03）的标清视频无法进行评分。高清视频的评分者间信度为0.96（95%置信区间，0.94 - 0.97）。评分失败比例从带宽最高的视频中的20%增加到带宽最低的视频中的60%（P < 0.001），不同帧率类别之间的比例无显著差异。正面和侧面视图对于使用视频成功评分都至关重要，60%至70%（P < 0.001）的视频无法仅通过单一视图进行评分。
尽管与面对面评分相比，使用视频对BBS进行评分时会有一些信息丢失，但在标准临床空间中远程可靠地对BBS进行评分是可行的。然而，最佳视频评分需要每次评估都有正面和侧面视图、高带宽的高清视频以及进行慢动作回看的能力。
