Our discussion forums are available to anyone to read, but you must be a member to reply or start new topics. Log-in or register to get started.

Viewing 2 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #490476
      Harriet Hill
      Participant

      Hi Chrissy,

      Do you have any citations for the evidence behind the 23/28 fall risk cut off for PD on the mini best? I can’t seem to find it anywhere, and SRA lab does not cite it.

    • #490481

      Hi Harriet,

      The 23 value came from the Leddy article (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3178037/) -(just above the discussion section. I find most articles don’t use the correct scoring guidelines for the Mini-BESTest and use a total score of 32 instead of 28. The Leddy team found that a score of 23 maximized sensitivity to minimize the likelihood of false negatives (mis-classifying someone as a non-faller when they are at risk of falling). There are a variety of numbers available in the literature (16, 19, 20, 21), so I think having a general feel for the Mini-BESTest and being able to eyeball if someone is in a falls risk range is sufficient for NCS purposes.

      There is another article in community-dwelling elderly (not PD) that has cut-offs by decade: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31162155/. Cut-off for 60-69 is 25, 70-79 is 23, 80-89 is 22, and 90+ is 17.

      Chrissy

    • #490482
      Harriet Hill
      Participant

      Thank you!

Viewing 2 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.