Comparison of the test-retest reliability of the balance computerized adaptive test and a computerized posturography instrument in patients with stroke.

Abstract

To compare the test-retest reliabilities of the scores of the Balance Computerized Adaptive Test (CAT) and the Biodex Balance System in patients with stroke. A repeated-measures design (at a 1-wk interval) was used to examine the test-retest reliabilities of the scores of the Balance CAT and the Biodex Balance System. One rehabilitation unit in a local hospital. Patients (N=50) with stroke for more than 6 months and undergoing outpatient rehabilitation completed the Balance CAT and the eyes open (EO)/closed (EC) tests, but only 17 patients finished the Limit of Stability (LOS) test because they were unable to reach all the targets. Not applicable. The Balance CAT and 2 computerized tests of the Biodex Balance System, namely the EO/EC test and the LOS, were used to evaluate balance function. The test-retest reliabilities of the scores of the Balance CAT (Pearson r=.92, minimal detectable change [MDC] percent=12.8%) was excellent. Those of the EO/EC and LOS tests were poor to good (Pearson r=.56-.85, MDC%=50.8%-126.9%). The test-retest reliabilities of the scores of the Balance CAT were sufficient for assessing balance function in patients with stroke. Moreover, the test-retest reliabilities of the scores of the Balance CAT, one of the functional balance measures, were superior to those of the Biodex Balance System, 1 type of computerized posturography instrument. Therefore, the Balance CAT may be a more reliable measure for clinicians and researchers to use in assessing the balance function of patients with stroke for more than 6 months.