Citation

Dijkhuizen A, Krijnen WP, van der Schans CP, Waninge A. Res. Dev. Disabil. 2017; 62: 58-68.

Affiliation

Hanze University of Applied Sciences Groningen, Research and Innovation Group in Health Care and in Nursing, Groningen, The Netherlands; Royal Dutch Visio, Centre of Expertise for Blind and Partially Sighted People, The Netherlands.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2017, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/j.ridd.2017.01.005

PMID

28113094

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A modified version of the Berg Balance Scale (mBBS) was developed for individuals with intellectual and visual disabilities (IVD). However, the concurrent and predictive validity has not yet been determined.

AIM: The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the concurrent and predictive validity of the mBBS for individuals with IVD.

METHOD: Fifty-four individuals with IVD and Gross Motor Functioning Classification System (GMFCS) Levels I and II participated in this study. The mBBS, the Centre of Gravity (COG), the Comfortable Walking Speed (CWS), and the Barthel Index (BI) were assessed during one session in order to determine the concurrent validity. The percentage of explained variance was determined by analyzing the squared multiple correlation between the mBBS and the BI, COG, CWS, GMFCS, and age, gender, level of intellectual disability, presence of epilepsy, level of visual impairment, and presence of hearing impairment. Furthermore, an overview of the degree of dependence between the mBBS, BI, CWS, and COG was obtained by graphic modelling. Predictive validity of mBBS was determined with respect to the number of falling incidents during 26 weeks and evaluated with Zero-inflated regression models using the explanatory variables of mBBS, BI, COG, CWS, and GMFCS.

RESULTS: The results demonstrated that two significant explanatory variables, the GMFCS Level and the BI, and one non-significant variable, the CWS, explained approximately 60% of the mBBS variance. Graphical modelling revealed that BI was the most important explanatory variable for mBBS moreso than COG and CWS. Zero-inflated regression on the frequency of falling incidents demonstrated that the mBBS was not predictive, however, COG and CWS were.

CONCLUSIONS: The results indicated that the concurrent validity as well as the predictive validity of mBBS were low for persons with IVD.

Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Language: en

Keywords

Activities of daily living; Balance; Intellectual disability; Visual impairment