Discrete combinations of muscle activity supported the 3 different sagittal balanced postures in sitting, providing new detail for surgeons, researchers, and therapists to distinguish between different sagittal balanced postures.
This study evaluated the intra-rater, inter-rater and test-retest reproducibility of the FullBESTest and Mini-BESTest when assessing postural control in children. Thirty-four children aged 7-17 years participated in intra-rater and inter-rater evaluation, and 22 children repeated assessment six weeks later for evaluation of test-retest reliability.Postural control was assessed using the Full Balance Evaluation Systems Test (FullBESTest) and the short-form Mini-BESTest. Intra-rater, inter-rater and test-retest reproducibility were examined using video assessment. Test-retest reproducibility was also assessed in real-time. Reproducibility was examined by agreement and reliability statistics. Agreement was calculated using percentage of agreement, Limits of Agreement and Smallest Detectable Change. Reliability was calculated using Intra-class Correlation Coefficients. Results showed that the reliability of Total Scores was excellent for the Full-BESTest for all conditions (all ICCs>0.82), whereas the MiniBESTest ranged from fair to excellent (ICC=0.56 to 0.86). Percentage of Domain Scores with good-excellent reliability (ICCs>0.60) was slightly higher for the FullBESTest (66%) compared to the Mini-BESTest (59%). Smallest Detectable Change scores were good to excellent for the Full-BESTest (2% to 6%) and for the BESTest (5% to 10%) relative to total test scores. Both the Full-BESTest and MiniBESTest can discriminate postural control abilities within and between days in schoolaged children. The Full-BESTest has slightly better reproducibility and a broader range of items, which could be the most useful version for treatment planning. We propose minor modifications are recommended to improve reproducibility for children, and indicate the modified version by the title Kids-BESTest. Future psychometric research is recommended for specific paediatric clinical populations.
Few studies quantify spinal posture behaviour at both the thoracolumbar and lumbar spinal regions. This study compared spontaneous spinal posture in 50 asymptomatic participants (21 males) during three conditions: 10-min computer task in sitting (participants naïve to the measure), during their perceived 'correct' sitting posture, and standing. Three-dimensional optical tracking quantified surface spinal angles at the thoracolumbar and lumbar regions, and spinal orientation with respect to the vertical. Despite popular belief that lordotic lumbar angles are 'correct' for sitting, this was rarely adopted for 10-min sitting. In 10-min sitting, spinal angles flexed 24(7-9)deg at lumbar and 12(6-8)deg at thoracolumbar regions relative to standing (P < 0.001). When participants 'corrected' their sitting posture, their thoracolumbar angle -2(7)deg was similar to the angle in standing -1(6)deg (P = 1.00). Males were flexed at the lumbar angle relative to females for 10-min sitting, 'correct' sitting and standing, but showed no difference at the thoracolumbar region.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.