Önal Birol, Köse Nezire, Önal Şeyma Nur, Zengin Hatice Yağmur
Department of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, Atatürk University, Erzurum, Türkiye.
Faculty of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Türkiye.
J Eval Clin Pract. 2025 Jun;31(4):e70141. doi: 10.1111/jep.70141.
Balance evaluation is essential for determining treatment and its effectiveness in stroke patients. Considering the widespread use of telehealth services, it is important to evaluate the applicability of balance scales for teleassessment. The aim in this study was to investigate the reliability and validity of the Berg Balance Scale (BBS) applied using synchronous and asynchronous teleassessment methods.
Teleassessments were performed by two physiotherapists. Synchronous assessments were conducted online in real time using the application Zoom, while asynchronous assessments involved patients recording videos according to a reference evaluation video sent to them. All tests were repeated 10 days later to assess intrarater reliability.
Thirty-six stroke patients (mean age 55.9 ± 9.5 years) participated in the study. Both synchronous and asynchronous teleassessments of the Berg Balance Scale (BBS) demonstrated excellent interrater reliability, with ICC values of 0.989 for synchronous and 0.997 for asynchronous assessments. Intrarater reliability was also high, with ICCs ranging from 0.982 to 0.997 across raters and methods. Regarding concurrent validity, synchronous teleassessment BBS scores showed a strong correlation with face-to-face BBS (r = 0.970) and Timed Balance Test (TBT) scores (r = 0.901), while asynchronous assessments also demonstrated strong correlations (BBS: r = 0.945; TBT: r = 0.885). Correlations with postural sway parameters were moderate, ranging from r =-0.40 to -0.54.
Our findings suggest that synchronous and asynchronous teleassessment of the BBS may be a viable alternative to face-to-face assessments. However, further research with larger samples is needed to support these findings and increase their generalizability.
ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05263063.
平衡评估对于确定中风患者的治疗方案及其疗效至关重要。鉴于远程医疗服务的广泛应用，评估平衡量表在远程评估中的适用性具有重要意义。本研究旨在探讨采用同步和异步远程评估方法应用伯格平衡量表（BBS）的可靠性和有效性。
由两名物理治疗师进行远程评估。同步评估通过应用程序Zoom实时在线进行，而异步评估则要求患者根据发送给他们的参考评估视频录制视频。所有测试在10天后重复进行，以评估评估者内部的可靠性。
36名中风患者（平均年龄55.9±9.5岁）参与了该研究。伯格平衡量表（BBS）的同步和异步远程评估均显示出极好的评估者间可靠性，同步评估的组内相关系数（ICC）值为0.989，异步评估为0.997。评估者内部可靠性也很高，不同评估者和方法的ICC值在0.982至0.997之间。关于同时效度，同步远程评估BBS分数与面对面BBS（r = 0.970）和定时平衡测试（TBT）分数（r = 0.901）显示出强烈相关性，而异步评估也显示出强烈相关性（BBS：r = 0.945；TBT：r = 0.885）。与姿势摆动参数的相关性为中等，范围从r = -0.40至-0.54。
我们的研究结果表明，BBS的同步和异步远程评估可能是面对面评估的可行替代方案。然而，需要更大样本量的进一步研究来支持这些发现并提高其普遍性。
ClinicalTrials.gov标识符：NCT0�263063。
