Meta- analysis demonstrated fallers perform significantly worse than non-fallers on all measures analysed except the Timed Up and Go Cognitive ( p < 0.05 ) , but discriminative ability of the measures is commonly not reported .
Of those reported , the Activities-specific Balance Confidence Scale had the highest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve value ( 0.92 ) , but without reporting corresponding measures of clinical utility .
Conclusion : Clinical measures of balance differ significantly between fallers and non-fallers but have poor predictive ability for falls risk in people with multiple sclerosis
Objective : To determine the ability of clinical measures of balance to distinguish fallers from non-fallers and to determine their predictive validity in identifying those at risk of falls .
Validity of the Dynamic Gait Index in People With Multiple Sclerosis
Background Evaluation of walking capacity and risk of falls in people with multiple sclerosis often are performed in rehabilitation . The Dynamic Gait Index ( DGI ) evaluates walking during different tasks , but the feasibility in identifying people at risk for falls needs to be further investigated . Objective The objective of this study was to investigate ( 1 ) the construct validity ( known groups , convergent , and discriminant ) of the DGI and ( 2 ) the accuracy of predicting falls and establishing a cutoff point to identify fallers . Design This trial was a multicenter , cross-sectional study . Methods A convenience sample was composed of 81 people with multiple sclerosis with subjective gait and balance impairment who were able to walk 100 m ( comparable to Exp and ed Disability Status Scale 1–6 ) . Mean age of the participants was 49 years ; 76 % were women . The  25-Foot Timed Walk Test , Timed “ Up & Go ” Test , Four Square Step Test , Timed Sit-to-St and Test , MS Walking Scale , Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale , and self-reported falls during the previous  2 months were used for validation , to establish cutoff points for identifying fallers , and to investigate predictive values . Results Significantly lower DGI scores ( P≤.001 ) were found for participants reporting falls ( n=31 ) . High sensitivity ( 87 % ) in identifying fallers was found , with a cutoff score ≤19 . The positive predictive value was 50 % , and the negative predictive value was 87 % . The positive likelihood ratio was 1.77 , and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.26 . The convergent validity was moderate to strong ( ρ=0.58–0.80 ) , with the highest correlation coefficient found for the 25-Foot Timed Walk Test . Discriminant validity was shown with low correlation for the psychological subscale of the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale . Limitations The sample included ambulatory people participating in a r and omized controlled trial investigating balance training . Conclusions The DGI is a valid measure of dynamic balance during walking for ambulatory people with multiple sclerosis . With the cutoff point of ≤19 , sensitivity was high in identifying people at risk of falls
Meta- analysis demonstrated fallers perform significantly worse than non-fallers on all measures analysed except the Timed Up and Go Cognitive ( p < 0.05 ) , but discriminative ability of the measures is commonly not reported .
Of those reported , the Activities-specific Balance Confidence Scale had the highest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve value ( 0.92 ) , but without reporting corresponding measures of clinical utility .
Conclusion : Clinical measures of balance differ significantly between fallers and non-fallers but have poor predictive ability for falls risk in people with multiple sclerosis
Objective : To determine the ability of clinical measures of balance to distinguish fallers from non-fallers and to determine their predictive validity in identifying those at risk of falls .