SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Validity and reliability of the 12-item Berg Balance Scale in an Italian population with Parkinson's disease: A cross sectional study.

Arq Neuropsiquiatr · 2020-06-08

DOI: 10.1590/0004-282x20200030PMID: 32520233

Check source for accessJournal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

BackgroundThe Berg Balance Scale is widely used to measure balance ability in clinical practice. Recently, the original version was redefined from 14 into 12 items. Its psychometric properties were investigated for different populations. However, for Parkinson disease the new version has not been validated yet.ObjectiveThe purpose of the present study was to evaluate psychometric properties of the 12-item Berg Balance Scale (BBS-12) in a population with Parkinson disease.MethodsInternal consistency was evaluated with Cronbach's alpha coefficient, whereas reliability was assessed with the intraclass correlation coefficient. For validity analysis, the Pearson correlation coefficient of the BBS-12 was evaluated with the Tinetti Scale and the Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly.ResultsThe BBS-12 was applied to 50 individuals with a mean age of 65.6 years (SD 11.8). The internal consistency showed a good value (Cronbach's alpha 0.886) and reproducibility reveled very high performances for both inter-rater and intra-rater reliabilities (ICC 0.987 and 0.986, respectively). The validity study demonstrated good linear correlation with the Tinetti Scale (pConclusionsThe present findings revealed the BBS-12 as a reliable and valid assessment tool to measure balance ability in Parkinson disease. Italian health professionals can now use it with more confidence.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.