Validity of the modified Berg Balance Scale in adults with intellectual and visual disabilities

Annemarie Dijkhuizen*, Wim P. Krijnen, Cees P. van der Schans, Aly Waninge

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: A modified version of the Berg Balance Scale (mBBS) was developed for individuals with intellectual and visual disabilities (IVD). However, the concurrent and predictive validity has not yet been determined.

Aim: The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the concurrent and predictive validity of the mBBS for individuals with IVD.

Method: Fifty-four individuals with IVD and Gross Motor Functioning Classification System (GMFCS) Levels I and II participated in this study. The mBBS, the Centre of Gravity (COG), the Comfortable Walking Speed (CWS), and the Barthel Index (BI) were assessed during one session in order to determine the concurrent validity. The percentage of explained variance was determined by analyzing the squared multiple correlation between the mBBS and the BI, COG, CWS, GMFCS, and age, gender, level of intellectual disability, presence of epilepsy, level of visual impairment, and presence of hearing impairment. Furthermore, an overview of the degree of dependence between the mBBS, BI, CWS, and COG was obtained by graphic modelling. Predictive validity of mBBS was determined with respect to the number of falling incidents during 26 weeks and evaluated with Zero-inflated regression models using the explanatory variables of mBBS, BI, COG, CWS, and GMFCS.

Results: The results demonstrated that two significant explanatory variables, the GMFCS Level and the BI, and one non-significant variable, the CWS, explained approximately 60% of the mBBS variance. Graphical modelling revealed that BI was the most important explanatory variable for mBBS moreso than COG and CWS. Zero-inflated regression on the frequency of falling incidents demonstrated that the mBBS was not predictive, however, COG and CWS were.

Conclusions: The results indicated that the concurrent validity as well as the predictive validity of mBBS were low for persons with IVD. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)58-68
Number of pages11
JournalResearch in Developmental Disabilities
Volume62
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Mar-2017

Keywords

  • Visual impairment
  • Intellectual disability
  • Balance
  • Activities of daily living
  • TEST-RETEST RELIABILITY
  • PHYSICAL-FITNESS
  • OLDER-ADULTS
  • RISK-FACTORS
  • INSTRUMENTAL ACTIVITIES
  • FALLS
  • PEOPLE
  • STROKE
  • FEASIBILITY
  • PERFORMANCE

Cite this