Open AccessBest Quantitative Tools for Assessing Static and Dynamic Standing Balance after Stroke: A Systematic Review
Author(s) -
Anne-Violette Bruyneel,
François Dubé
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
physiotherapy canada
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.389
H-Index - 27
eISSN - 1708-8313
pISSN - 0300-0508
DOI - 10.3138/ptc-2020-0005
Subject(s) - checklist , physical therapy , physical medicine and rehabilitation , medline , cinahl , stroke (engine) , medicine , population , balance (ability) , psychology , psychiatry , mechanical engineering , environmental health , political science , psychological intervention , law , cognitive psychology , engineering
Purpose: Our objective was to examine the psychometric qualities (reliability and validity) and clinical utility of quantitative tools in measuring the static and dynamic standing balance of individuals after stroke. Method: We searched four databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, PEDro, Embase, and CINAHL) for studies published from January 2018 through September 2019 and included those that assessed the psychometric properties of standing balance tests with an adult stroke population. We evaluated the quality of the studies using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist and assessed each test on a utility assessment scale. Results: A total of 22 studies met the inclusion criteria, and 18 quantitative tools for assessing static or dynamic standing balance of individuals with stroke were analyzed. Findings support good or excellent reliability for all tests, whereas correlations for validity ranged from weak to strong. Study quality was variable. Dynamic balance tests had better clinical utility scores than static ones. Five tests had complete psychometric analyses: quiet standing on a force platform, five-step test, sideways step, step length, and turn tests.