Article

OBJECTIVE: To compare Berg Balance Scale (BBS) rating using videos with differing
transmission characteristics with direct in-person rating. DESIGN:
Repeated-measures study for the assessment of the BBS in 8 configurations: in
person, high-definition video with slow motion review, standard-definition videos
with varying bandwidths and frame rates (768 kilobytes per second [kbps] videos
at 8, 15, and 30 frames per second [fps], 30 fps videos at 128, 384, and 768
kbps). SETTING: Medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with limitations (N=45) in
>/=1 of 3 specific aspects of motor function: fine motor coordination, gross
motor coordination, and gait and balance. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN
OUTCOMES MEASURES: Ability to rate the BBS in person and using videos with
differing bandwidths and frame rates in frontal and lateral views. RESULTS:
Compared with in-person rating (7%), 18% (P=.29) of high-definition videos and
37% (P=.03) of standard-definition videos could not be rated. Interrater
reliability for the high-definition videos was .96 (95% confidence interval,
.94-.97). Rating failure proportions increased from 20% in videos with the
highest bandwidth to 60% (P<.001) in videos with the lowest bandwidth, with no
significant differences in proportions across frame rate categories. Both frontal
and lateral views were critical for successful rating using videos, with 60% to
70% (P<.001) of videos unable to be rated on a single view. CONCLUSIONS: Although
there is some loss of information when using videos to rate the BBS compared to
in-person ratings, it is feasible to reliably rate the BBS remotely in standard
clinical spaces. However, optimal video rating requires frontal and lateral views
for each assessment, high-definition video with high bandwidth, and the ability
to carry out slow motion review.
CI - Copyright (c) 2016 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Published by
Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Langue : ANGLAIS