Journal Home
Search for

Volume 88, Issue 12, Pages 1614-1621 (December 2007)


View previous. 11 of 46 View next.

Development and Validation of the Balance Outcome Measure for Elder Rehabilitation

Terry Haines, PhDabCorresponding Author Informationemail address, Suzanne S. Kuys, BPhtybc, Greg Morrison, BPhtyb, Jane Clarke, BPhtyd, Paul Bew, BPhtye, Steven McPhail, BPhtyb

Abstract 

Haines T, Kuys SS, Morrison G, Clarke J, Bew P, McPhail S. Development and validation of the Balance Outcome Measure for Elder Rehabilitation.

Objective

To develop and investigate the internal consistency, criterion-related validation, and minimum clinically significant difference of a new standing balance outcome measure for Elder Rehabilitation.

Design

Three phases: (1) cross-sectional survey with expert panel, (2) multicenter prospective cohort randomly divided into development and validation datasets, and (3) prospective cohort (single site).

Setting

Geriatric and rehabilitation units across 2 states in Australia.

Participants

A total of 1769 admissions across 17 geriatric assessment and rehabilitation units.

Interventions

Not applicable.

Main Outcome Measures

The Balance Outcome Measure for Elder Rehabilitation (BOOMER) consisted of the step test, Timed Up & Go test, Functional Reach Test, and static standing with feet together and eyes closed test. Criterion-related validity was established through comparison to the Modified Elderly Mobility Scale (MEMS) and the FIM motor score.

Results

Items of the BOOMER were already used at a majority of rehabilitation facilities surveyed. The BOOMER showed high levels of internal consistency (Cronbach α>.87) and had good correlation with the FIM motor and the MEMS (ρ>.72). The minimum clinically significant change in the BOOMER was 3 points over a 17-point scale range.

Conclusions

The BOOMER is a clinically applicable measure of standing balance among older rehabilitation patients with evidence of content and construct validity.

a Division of Physiotherapy, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia

b Physiotherapy Department, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Australia

c School of Physiotherapy and Exercise Science, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia

d St Andrews War Memorial Hospital, Brisbane, Australia

e The Prince Charles Hospital, Brisbane, Australia.

Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests to Terry Haines, PhD, Physiotherapy Department, GARU, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Ipswich Rd, Woolloongabba, QLD 4102, Australia

 Supported by the University of Queensland New Staff Research Fund.

 No commercial party having a direct financial interest in the results of the research supporting this article has or will confer a benefit upon the author(s) or upon any organization with which the author(s) is/are associated.

PII: S0003-9993(07)01563-8

doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2007.09.012


View previous. 11 of 46 View next.