Clinical rehabilitation · 2012
Validity of the Sitting Balance Scale in older adults who are non-ambulatory or have limited functional mobility.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Thompson Mary, Medley Ann, Teran Steve
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the Sitting Balance Scale is an acceptable alternative to the Trunk Impairment Scale for measuring the construct of sitting balance, to examine relationships with other clinical outcomes and to establish discriminative validity.
DESIGN: Prospective descriptive methodological study.
SETTING: Acute care, inpatient rehabilitation, skilled nursing facility and home health.
PARTICIPANTS: Patients receiving physical therapy (N = 98; n = 20 acute care, n = 18 inpatient rehabilitation, n = 30 skilled nursing facility, n = 30 home setting) mean (SD) age, 80.5 (7.9) years. Nineteen were non-ambulatory and 79 had limited functional mobility with Timed Up and Go scores ≥20 seconds.
MAIN MEASURES: Sitting Balance Scale, Trunk Impairment Scale, Timed Up and Go, length of stay and setting specific clinical measures of sitting balance (OASIS-C M1850; MDS G-3b).
RESULTS: Moderate association between ambulatory status and sitting balance measures (Sitting Balance Scale r = 0.67, Trunk Impairment Scale r = 0.61; P = 0.0001). Moderate to strong relationships between Sitting Balance Scale, Trunk Impairment Scale and clinical outcomes varying by setting. MANOVA results revealed differences between ambulators and non-ambulators and among diagnostic categories for both instruments (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The Sitting Balance Scale is comparable to the Trunk Impairment Scale for measuring sitting balance in older adults who are non-ambulatory or have limited mobility.
DESIGN: Prospective descriptive methodological study.
SETTING: Acute care, inpatient rehabilitation, skilled nursing facility and home health.
PARTICIPANTS: Patients receiving physical therapy (N = 98; n = 20 acute care, n = 18 inpatient rehabilitation, n = 30 skilled nursing facility, n = 30 home setting) mean (SD) age, 80.5 (7.9) years. Nineteen were non-ambulatory and 79 had limited functional mobility with Timed Up and Go scores ≥20 seconds.
MAIN MEASURES: Sitting Balance Scale, Trunk Impairment Scale, Timed Up and Go, length of stay and setting specific clinical measures of sitting balance (OASIS-C M1850; MDS G-3b).
RESULTS: Moderate association between ambulatory status and sitting balance measures (Sitting Balance Scale r = 0.67, Trunk Impairment Scale r = 0.61; P = 0.0001). Moderate to strong relationships between Sitting Balance Scale, Trunk Impairment Scale and clinical outcomes varying by setting. MANOVA results revealed differences between ambulators and non-ambulators and among diagnostic categories for both instruments (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The Sitting Balance Scale is comparable to the Trunk Impairment Scale for measuring sitting balance in older adults who are non-ambulatory or have limited mobility.