Background/Aims: The aim of this research was to verify psychometric properties of the Berg Balance Scale and the Fullerton Advanced Balance Scale, and compare the item difficulty between the two scales. Methods: A total of 97 community-dwelling older adults participated in this study. All participants were assessed on their degree of balance ability by the Berg Balance Scale and the Fullerton Advanced Balance Scale, respectively. We identified the psychometric properties and compared the item difficulty of the two scales using the Rasch analysis. Findings: Among the items on the Berg Balance Scale, the Standing to sitting and Transfers items showed misfit statistics. The most difficult item was Standing on one foot, whereas the easiest item was Sitting unsupported. In the case of the Fullerton Advanced Balance Scale, the Standing with feet together and eyes closed, Stand on foam, eyes closed and Walk with head turns items showed misfit statistics. Also, the most difficult item was Stand on one leg (logit value, 2.93), whereas the easiest item was Turn in full circle. Among the 24 items of the combined Berg Balance Scale and Fullerton Advanced Balance Scale, 13 items (nine items for the Fullerton Advanced Balance Scale and four items on the Berg Balance Scale) had positive logit values, and 11 items (one item on the FAB and 10 on the Berg Balance Scale) had negative logit values. Conclusions: Both the Berg Balance Scale and the Fullerton Advanced Balance appear to be reliable and valid tools to assess balance function in older adults. However, the Berg Balance Scale is suitable for assessing balance ability in a group of lower functioning older adults, whereas, the Fullerton Advanced Balance is suitable for assessing balance ability in a group of higher functioning older adults.
|Number of pages||8|
|Journal||International Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation|
|Publication status||Published - 2017 Dec|
Bibliographical noteFunding Information:
This research was supported by Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (2015R1D1A1A01057620).
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation