Comparative Utility of the BESTest, Mini-BESTest, and Brief-BESTest for Predicting Falls in Individuals With Parkinson Disease: A Cohort Study

作者：Duncan Ryan P; Leddy Abigail L; Cavanaugh James T; Dibble Leland E; Ellis Terry D; Ford Matthew P; Foreman K Bo; Earhart Gammon M^*

来源：Physical Therapy, 2013, 93(4): 542-550.

DOI：10.2522/ptj.20120302

Background. The newly developed Brief-Balance Evaluation System Test (Brief-BESTest) may be useful for measuring balance and predicting falls in individuals with Parkinson disease (PD). %26lt;br%26gt;Objectives. The purposes of this study were: (1) to describe the balance performance of those with PD using the Brief-BESTest, (2) to determine the relationships among the scores derived from the 3 versions of the BESTest (ie, full BESTest, Mini-BESTest, and Brief-BESTest), and (3) to compare the accuracy of the Brief-BESTest with that of the Mini-BESTest and BESTest in identifying recurrent fallers among people with PD. %26lt;br%26gt;Design. This was a prospective cohort study. %26lt;br%26gt;Methods. Eighty participants with PD completed a baseline balance assessment. All participants reported a fall history during the previous 6 months. Fall history was again collected 6 months (n=51) and 12 months (n=40) later. %26lt;br%26gt;Results. At baseline, participants, had varying levels of balance impairment, and Brief-BESTest scores were significantly correlated with Mini-BESTest (r=.94, P%26lt;.001) and BESTest (r=.95, P%26lt;.001) scores. Six-month retrospective fall prediction accuracy of the Brief-BESTest was moderately high (area under the curve [AUC]=0.82, sensitivity=0.76, and specificity=0.84). Prospective fall prediction accuracy over 6 months was similarly accurate (AUC=0.88, sensitivity=0.71, and specificity=0.87), but was less sensitive over 12 months (AUC=0.76, sensitivity=0.53, and specificity=0.93). %26lt;br%26gt;Limitations. The sample included primarily individuals with mild to moderate PD. Also, there was a moderate dropout rate at 6 and 12 months. %26lt;br%26gt;Conclusions. All versions of the BESTest were reasonably accurate in identifying future recurrent fallers, especially during the 6 months following assessment. Clinicians can reasonably rely on the Brief-BESTest for predicting falls, particularly when time and equipment constraints are of concern.

• 出版日期2013-4