Military medicine · 2020
The Community Balance and Mobility Scale: Detecting Impairments in Military Service Members With Mild Traumatic Brain Injury.
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.
Pape Marcy M, Kodosky Paula N, Hoover Peter
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to determine the utility of the Community Balance and Mobility scale (CB&M) among service members presenting with mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI), to compare the results against well-established balance assessments, and to find a new military-specific CB&M cut score to help differentiate those with and without mTBI.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The setting was a 4-week, intensive-outpatient, interdisciplinary program for active duty service members with mTBI. This was a nonrandomized, cross-sectional design that compared multiple measures between two groups: active duty service members with (n = 45) and without (n = 45) mTBI. The assessments, including the Activities-Specific Balance Confidence Scale, gait speed (comfortable and fast), the Functional Gait Assessment, and the CB&M, were provided to both sample groups.
RESULTS: The mTBI group performed significantly worse (P ≤ 0.01) across all measures. A higher cut score for the CB&M of 81.5 is suggested. The CB&M demonstrated the best sensitivity (78%) and specificity (91%) ratio, as well as the largest effect size and area under the curve(0.92).
CONCLUSION: All objective measures distinguish participants with mTBI from controls, ranging from fair to excellent. The recommended CB&M cut score of 81.5 allows for good variance, standard deviation, and reduced risk of ceiling or floor effects. Further examination of the recommended CB&M cut score is warranted for use in the mTBI civilian populations.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The setting was a 4-week, intensive-outpatient, interdisciplinary program for active duty service members with mTBI. This was a nonrandomized, cross-sectional design that compared multiple measures between two groups: active duty service members with (n = 45) and without (n = 45) mTBI. The assessments, including the Activities-Specific Balance Confidence Scale, gait speed (comfortable and fast), the Functional Gait Assessment, and the CB&M, were provided to both sample groups.
RESULTS: The mTBI group performed significantly worse (P ≤ 0.01) across all measures. A higher cut score for the CB&M of 81.5 is suggested. The CB&M demonstrated the best sensitivity (78%) and specificity (91%) ratio, as well as the largest effect size and area under the curve(0.92).
CONCLUSION: All objective measures distinguish participants with mTBI from controls, ranging from fair to excellent. The recommended CB&M cut score of 81.5 allows for good variance, standard deviation, and reduced risk of ceiling or floor effects. Further examination of the recommended CB&M cut score is warranted for use in the mTBI civilian populations.