Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10397/89281
PIRA download icon_1.1View/Download Full Text
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributorDepartment of Rehabilitation Sciencesen_US
dc.creatorChan, ACMen_US
dc.creatorPang, MYCen_US
dc.creatorOuyang, Hen_US
dc.creatorJehu, DAMen_US
dc.date.accessioned2021-03-05T07:39:12Z-
dc.date.available2021-03-05T07:39:12Z-
dc.identifier.issn1934-1482en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10397/89281-
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherJohn Wiley & Sons, Inc.en_US
dc.rights© 2019 American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitationen_US
dc.rightsThis is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Chan, A.C.M., Pang, M.Y.C., Ouyang, H. and Jehu, D.A.M. (2020), Minimal Clinically Important Difference of Four Commonly Used Balance Assessment Tools in Individuals after Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective Cohort Study. PM&R: The Journal of Injury, Function and Rehabilitation, 12: 238-245, which has been published in final form at https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pmrj.12226. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Use of Self-Archived Versions. This article may not be enhanced, enriched or otherwise transformed into a derivative work, without express permission from Wiley or by statutory rights under applicable legislation. Copyright notices must not be removed, obscured or modified. The article must be linked to Wiley’s version of record on Wiley Online Library and any embedding, framing or otherwise making available the article or pages thereof by third parties from platforms, services and websites other than Wiley Online Library must be prohibited.en_US
dc.titleMinimal clinically important difference of four commonly used balance assessment tools in individuals after total knee arthroplasty : a prospective cohort studyen_US
dc.typeJournal/Magazine Articleen_US
dc.identifier.spage238en_US
dc.identifier.epage245en_US
dc.identifier.volume12en_US
dc.identifier.issue3en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/pmrj.12226en_US
dcterms.abstractBackground: Although balance is commonly assessed during the recovery of total knee arthroplasty (TKA), the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) values of frequently used balance assessment tools have not been established previously in this population.en_US
dcterms.abstractObjective: To determine the MCID of four balance tests—ie, the Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest), Mini-BESTest, Brief-BESTest, and the Berg Balance Scale (BBS)—in individuals post-TKA.en_US
dcterms.abstractDesign: Prospective cohort.en_US
dcterms.abstractSetting: Outpatient rehabilitation.en_US
dcterms.abstractParticipants: Inclusion criteria: (1) first primary TKA with diagnosed knee osteoarthritis; (2) aged 50-85 years. Exclusion criteria: (1) TKA due to rheumatoid arthritis of the knee or traumatic injury; (2) known medical conditions that influence balance ability. One hundred forty-six participants were recruited, and 134 of them with complete data were included in the analysis.en_US
dcterms.abstractInterventions: Participants received individualized physiotherapy, consisting of electrotherapy for pain and edema control, mobilization and strengthening exercises, and gait and balance training, once or twice per week between assessments.en_US
dcterms.abstractMain Outcome Measurements: Participants were assessed on the BESTest, Mini-BESTest, Brief-BESTest, BBS, and Functional Gait Assessment (FGA) 2 and 4 weeks after surgery. The FGA was used as the anchor reference measure to calculate the MCID of the other four balance tests. A distribution-based approach was also employed to derive the MCID (ie, standardized effect size of 0.5).en_US
dcterms.abstractResults: The BESTest (area under curve [AUC] = 0.811, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.739-0.883) had the highest accuracy in detecting clinically important improvements on the FGA (≥4 points), followed by the Mini-BESTest (AUC = 0.782, 95% CI 0.704-0.860), Brief-BESTest (AUC = 0.701, 95% CI 0.618-0.795), and BBS (AUC = 0.586, 95% CI 0.490-0.682). The anchor- and distribution-based MCIDs were 6-8 for the BESTest, 1-2 for the Mini-BESTest, and 2-3 for the Brief-BESTest.en_US
dcterms.abstractConclusions: Improvements exceeding MCIDs established above are indicative of significant progress in balance function post-TKA. The BBS is not a recommended tool due to its low AUC value.en_US
dcterms.accessRightsopen accessen_US
dcterms.bibliographicCitationPM and R, Mar. 2020, v. 12, no. 3, p. 238-245en_US
dcterms.isPartOfPM and Ren_US
dcterms.issued2020-03-
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85073951943-
dc.identifier.pmid31359626-
dc.identifier.eissn1934-1563en_US
dc.description.validate202103 bcvcen_US
dc.description.oaAccepted Manuscripten_US
dc.identifier.FolderNumbera0590-n37-
dc.identifier.SubFormID361-
dc.description.fundingSourceSelf-fundeden_US
dc.description.pubStatusPublisheden_US
Appears in Collections:Journal/Magazine Article
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Chan_Minimal_Knee_Arthroplasty.pdfPre-Published version557.93 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
Open Access Information
Status open access
File Version Final Accepted Manuscript
Access
View full-text via PolyU eLinks SFX Query
Show simple item record

Page views

72
Last Week
0
Last month
Citations as of Apr 21, 2024

Downloads

90
Citations as of Apr 21, 2024

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

14
Citations as of Apr 19, 2024

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

13
Citations as of Apr 18, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.