School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
School of Biomedical Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Disabil Rehabil. 2022 Jul;44(15):4039-4046. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2021.1887374. Epub 2021 Feb 28.
Evaluate the validity of the Clinical Test of Sensory Integration of Balance (CTSIB) scored using Kids-Balance Evaluation Systems Test (Kids-BESTest) criteria compared to laboratory measures of postural control.
Participants were 58 children, 7-18 years, 17 with ambulant cerebral palsy (CP) (GMFCS I-II), and 41 typically developing (TD). Postural control in standing was assessed using CTSIB items firm and foam surfaces, eyes open (EO) then closed (EC). Face validity was evaluated comparing clinical Kids-BESTest scores between groups. Correlating force plate centre-of-pressure (CoP) data and clinical scores allowed evaluation of concurrent and content validity.
Face validity: TD children scored higher for all CTSIB conditions when compared to children with CP. Concurrent validity: the agreement between clinical and CoP derived scores was poor to excellent (Firm-EO = 76%, Firm-EC = 76%, Foam-EO = 59%, Foam-EC = 94%). Clinical scores of "2-" and "3" were not distinguished reliably by force plate measures. Content validity: significant correlations were found between clinical scores and CoP data for the two intermediate conditions (Firm-EC: -0.40 to -0.72; Foam-EO: -0.12 to -0.50), but not the easier (Firm-EO: -0.41 to -0.36) or harder conditions (Foam-EC: -0.25 to -0.27).
Face validity of Kids-BESTest CTSIB criteria was supported. Content and concurrent validity were partially supported. Improved Kids-BESTest scoring terms were recommended to describe postural characteristics of "2"IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONFace validity of the Kids-BESTest criteria for the CTSIB was confirmed.The Kids-BESTest criteria for the CTSIB can identify children with atypical postural control.Concurrent validity and content validity were partially supported, since children with CP resorted to a range of different balance strategies when "unstable."To improve CTSIB Kids-BESTest criteria, new terms were recommended to better describe postural characteristics of "2-unstable."
评估使用 Kids-Balance Evaluation Systems Test (Kids-BESTest) 标准评分的 Clinical Test of Sensory Integration of Balance (CTSIB) 的有效性，与姿势控制的实验室测量值相比。
参与者为 58 名 7-18 岁的儿童，其中 17 名患有可走动性脑瘫 (CP) (GMFCS I-II)，41 名发育正常 (TD)。使用 CTSIB 项目在站立时评估姿势控制，在坚硬和泡沫表面、睁眼 (EO) 然后闭眼 (EC) 下进行。通过比较组间的临床 Kids-BESTest 评分来评估表面效度。将测力板中心压力 (CoP) 数据与临床评分相关联，以评估同时性和内容效度。
表面效度：与 CP 儿童相比，TD 儿童在所有 CTSIB 条件下的得分都更高。同时性效度：临床和 CoP 衍生评分之间的一致性为差到极好 (Firm-EO = 76%，Firm-EC = 76%，Foam-EO = 59%，Foam-EC = 94%)。测力板测量无法可靠地区分临床评分的“2-”和“3”。内容效度：在两个中间条件下，临床评分与 CoP 数据之间存在显著相关性 (Firm-EC：-0.40 至-0.72；Foam-EO：-0.12 至-0.50)，但在较容易 (Firm-EO：-0.41 至-0.36) 或较难条件下则没有相关性 (Foam-EC：-0.25 至-0.27)。
Kids-BESTest CTSIB 标准的表面效度得到支持。内容和同时性效度得到部分支持。建议改进 Kids-BESTest 评分术语，以更好地描述“2-不稳定”的姿势特征。
Kids-BESTest 标准的 CTSIB 的表面效度得到确认。
Kids-BESTest 标准的 CTSIB 可识别具有异常姿势控制的儿童。
同时性和内容效度得到部分支持，因为 CP 儿童在“不稳定”时会采用一系列不同的平衡策略。
为了改进 CTSIB Kids-BESTest 标准，建议使用新术语来更好地描述“2-不稳定”的姿势特征。
