Reliability and Usability Analysis of an Embedded System Capable of Evaluating Balance in Elderly Populations Based on a Modified Wii Balance Board
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Population
2.2. Variables
2.3. Reliability
2.4. Statistical Analysis
2.5. Sample Size Calculation
- is the sample size for the test–retest reliability,
- , assuming a 95% confidence level,
- , assuming a β error of 0.075, and
- , is the expected correlation coefficient.
- is the sample size for the inter-rater reliability,
- , assuming a 95% confidence level,
- , is the expected correlation coefficient,
- , is the width of the confidence interval,
- , is the number of examiners.
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
CoP Indices | Units | Description | Formula |
---|---|---|---|
RD | mm | Resultant Distance time series | |
MDIST | mm | Mean Distance | |
MDISTML | mm | Mean Distance in Medial-Lateral displacement | |
MDISTAP | mm | Mean Distance in Anterior-Posterior displacement | |
RDIST | mm | RMS distance value from the mean CoP | |
RDISTML | mm | RMS distance of the Medial-Lateral time series | |
RDISTAP | mm | RMS distance of the Anterior-Posterior time series | |
RANGE | mm | Maximum distance between any two points (p1, p2) on the CoP path | |
RANGEML | mm | Range of Medial-Lateral CoP time series | |
RANGEAP | mm | Range of Anterior-Posterior CoP time series | |
MVEL | mm/s | Mean Velocity of the CoP | |
MVELML | mm/s | Mean CoP Velocity in Medial-Lateral direction | |
MVELAP | mm/s | Mean CoP Velocity in Anterior-Posterior direction | |
sRD | mm | Standar Deviation of the RD time series | |
sAPML | mm2 | Covariance of Medial-Lateral & Anterior-Posterior data | |
AREACC | mm2 | 95% Confidence Circle Area | |
AREACE | mm2 | 95% Confidence Ellipse Area | |
AREASW | mm2/s | Sway Area of the CoP path per unit of time | |
MFREQ | Hz | Mean Frequency of CoP | |
MFREQML | Hz | Mean Frequency of Medial-Lateral CoP time series | |
MFREQAP | Hz | Mean Frequency of Anterior-Posterior CoP time series | |
FDPD | - | Fractal dimension that models the area of the stabilogram with a circle of diameter d = range | |
FDCC | - | Fractal dimension based on AREACC | |
FDCE | - | Fractal dimension based on AREACE | |
TPOWERRD | mm2/Hz | Total Power of CoP Resultant Distance data | |
TPOWERML | mm2/Hz | Total Power of CoP Medial-Lateral data | |
TPOWERAP | mm2/Hz | Total Power of CoP Anterior-Posterior data | |
POWER50RD | Hz | 50% Power Frequency of Resultant Distance CoP data | |
POWER50ML | Hz | 50% Power Frequency of Medial-Lateral CoP data | |
POWER50AP | Hz | 50% Power Frequency of Anterior-Posterior CoP data | |
POWER95RD | Hz | 95% Power Frequency of Resultant Distance CoP data | |
POWER95ML | Hz | 95% Power Frequency of Medial-Lateral CoP data | |
POWER95AP | Hz | 95% Power Frequency of Anterior-Posterior CoP data | |
CFREQRD | Hz | Centroidal Frequency of Resultant Distance CoP data | |
CFREQML | Hz | Centroidal Frequency of Medial-Lateral CoP data | |
CFREQAP | Hz | Centroidal Frequency of Anterior-Posterior CoP data | |
FREQDRD | - | Frequency Dispersion of Resultant Distance CoP data | |
FREQDML | - | Frequency Dispersion of Medial-Lateral CoP data | |
FREQDAP | - | Frequency Dispersion of Anterior-Posterior CoP data |
Appendix B
Strongly Disagree | Strongly Agree | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. I think I would like to use the mWBB frequently. | 1 ☐ | 2 ☐ | 3 ☐ | 4 ☐ | 5 ☐ |
2. I find the mWBB very complex. | 1 ☐ | 2 ☐ | 3 ☐ | 4 ☐ | 5 ☐ |
3. I think the mWBB is easy to use. | 1 ☐ | 2 ☐ | 3 ☐ | 4 ☐ | 5 ☐ |
4. I think I would need technical support to make use of the mWBB. | 1 ☐ | 2 ☐ | 3 ☐ | 4 ☐ | 5 ☐ |
5. I find the various functions of the mWBB well integrated. | 1 ☐ | 2 ☐ | 3 ☐ | 4 ☐ | 5 ☐ |
6. I think there is too much inconsistency in the mWBB. | 1 ☐ | 2 ☐ | 3 ☐ | 4 ☐ | 5 ☐ |
7. I think most people would learn to use the mWBB quickly. | 1 ☐ | 2 ☐ | 3 ☐ | 4 ☐ | 5 ☐ |
8. I find the mWBB quite uncomfortable to use. | 1 ☐ | 2 ☐ | 3 ☐ | 4 ☐ | 5 ☐ |
9. I feel very confident in using the mWBB. | 1 ☐ | 2 ☐ | 3 ☐ | 4 ☐ | 5 ☐ |
10. I needed to learn a lot of things before I could operate the mWBB properly. | 1 ☐ | 2 ☐ | 3 ☐ | 4 ☐ | 5 ☐ |
Appendix C
CoP Indices | Test Mean (SD) | Retest Mean (SD) | p-Value Shapiro–Wilk Test | p-Value Means Difference Test |
---|---|---|---|---|
RDOE | 13,913.74 (6860.32) | 15,163.36 (6547.64) | 0.810 | 0.268 |
MDISTOE | 5.79 (2.85) | 6.31 (2.72) | 0.810 | 0.268 |
MDISTMLOE | 3.45 (1.83) | 3.96 (1.98) | 0.638 | 0.063 |
MDISTAPOE | 3.83 (2.06) | 4.09 (1.86) | 0.632 | 0.550 |
RDISTOE | 6.72 (3.37) | 7.22 (3.08) | 0.629 | 0.311 |
RDISTMLOE | 4.41 (2.4) | 4.98 (2.49) | 0.974 | 0.079 |
RDISTAPOE | 4.91 (2.69) | 5.06 (2.27) | 0.558 | 0.772 |
RANGEOE | 33.09 (17.77) | 33.54 (15.78) | 0.754 | 0.871 |
RANGEMLOE | 25.36 (15.46) | 28.23 (17.17) | 0.673 | 0.237 |
RANGEAPOE | 30.14 (17.27) | 27.16 (12.31) | 0.967 | 0.280 |
MVELOE | 21.52 (14.2) | 21.97 (13.75) | 0.021 * | 0.642 |
MVELMLOE | 9.65 (7.25) | 10.49 (8.04) | 1.000 | 0.288 |
MVELAPOE | 17.09 (11.39) | 16.86 (10.41) | 0.002 * | 0.918 |
sRDOE | 3.39 (1.81) | 3.48 (1.51) | 0.056 | 0.684 |
sAPMLOE | −3.14 (5.91) | −0.48 (14.53) | 0.376 | 0.524 |
AREACCOE | 507.37 (497.54) | 534.65 (497.19) | 0.028 * | 0.535 |
AREACEOE | 480.76 (467.52) | 492.03 (501.33) | 0.100 | 0.883 |
AREASWOE | 47.95 (52.87) | 51.52 (68.26) | 0.013 * | 0.501 |
MFREQOE | 0.58 (0.19) | 0.58 (0.35) | 0.000 * | 0.278 |
MFREQMLOE | 0.49 (0.17) | 0.48 (0.2) | 0.397 | 0.817 |
MFREQAPOE | 0.78 (0.33) | 0.77 (0.47) | 0.030 * | 0.438 |
FDPDOE | 1.78 (0.14) | 1.78 (0.18) | 0.529 | 0.930 |
FDCCOE | 1.94 (0.17) | 1.93 (0.26) | 0.062 | 0.827 |
FDCEOE | 1.95 (0.16) | 1.96 (0.25) | 0.003 * | 0.569 |
TPOWERRDOE | 9.65 (12.65) | 8.67 (10.11) | 0.000 * | 1.000 |
TPOWERMLOE | 12.43 (16.54) | 12.39 (17.96) | 0.821 | 0.985 |
TPOWERAPOE | 18.56 (30.14) | 13.01 (14.87) | 0.000 * | 0.836 |
POWER50RDOE | 0.52 (0.13) | 0.55 (0.28) | 0.006 * | 0.816 |
POWER50MLOE | 0.41 (0.1) | 0.37 (0.08) | 0.024 * | 0.265 |
POWER50APOE | 0.53 (0.17) | 0.58 (0.24) | 0.113 | 0.389 |
POWER95RDOE | 2.08 (0.65) | 2.09 (0.81) | 0.496 | 0.853 |
POWER95MLOE | 1.44 (0.82) | 1.37 (0.68) | 0.002 * | 0.820 |
POWER95APOE | 1.99 (0.68) | 2.08 (0.86) | 0.315 | 0.466 |
CFREQRDOE | 1.02 (0.24) | 1.03 (0.4) | 0.044 * | 0.756 |
CFREQMLOE | 0.72 (0.24) | 0.7 (0.21) | 0.463 | 0.484 |
CFREQAPOE | 0.98 (0.24) | 1.03 (0.39) | 0.298 | 0.408 |
FREQDRDOE | 0.67 (0.04) | 0.66 (0.04) | 0.878 | 0.582 |
FREQDMLOE | 0.63 (0.07) | 0.64 (0.05) | 0.179 | 0.410 |
FREQDAPOE | 0.66 (0.06) | 0.64 (0.05) | 0.968 | 0.297 |
RDCE | 16,923.1 (6812.85) | 17,838.53 (7641.53) | 0.005 * | 0.501 |
MDISTCE | 7.05 (2.83) | 7.43 (3.18) | 0.005 * | 0.501 |
MDISTMLCE | 4.02 (2.13) | 4.77 (2.41) | 0.138 | 0.166 |
MDISTAPCE | 4.85 (2.03) | 4.69 (1.83) | 0.210 | 0.565 |
RDISTCE | 8.14 (3.37) | 8.55 (3.69) | 0.023 * | 0.642 |
RDISTMLCE | 5.12 (2.82) | 6.08 (3.11) | 0.118 | 0.156 |
RDISTAPCE | 6.08 (2.58) | 5.9 (2.3) | 0.202 | 0.604 |
RANGECE | 40.48 (18.09) | 42.18 (20.48) | 0.725 | 0.644 |
RANGEMLCE | 29.8 (17.87) | 36.98 (22.15) | 0.788 | 0.159 |
RANGEAPCE | 35.53 (16.66) | 34.04 (12.66) | 0.243 | 0.574 |
MVELCE | 27.49 (18.03) | 29.91 (14.18) | 0.711 | 0.375 |
MVELMLCE | 12.42 (8.85) | 14.65 (8.18) | 0.852 | 0.213 |
MVELAPCE | 21.84 (14.39) | 22.66 (11.35) | 0.035 * | 1.000 |
sRDCE | 4.06 (1.86) | 4.21 (1.94) | 0.870 | 0.694 |
sAPMLCE | −1.93 (10.24) | 0.57 (16.89) | 0.300 | 0.449 |
AREACCCE | 694.38 (495.01) | 764.61 (562.87) | 0.023 * | 0.605 |
AREACECE | 634.3 (471.31) | 739.93 (544.89) | 0.001 * | 0.148 |
AREASWCE | 74.12 (73.45) | 79.52 (54.79) | 0.020 * | 0.569 |
MFREQCE | 0.59 (0.22) | 0.68 (0.38) | 0.000 * | 0.569 |
MFREQMLCE | 0.58 (0.3) | 0.57 (0.23) | 0.134 | 0.822 |
MFREQAPCE | 0.77 (0.34) | 0.89 (0.56) | 0.000 * | 0.679 |
FDPDCE | 1.78 (0.13) | 1.83 (0.20) | 0.220 | 0.268 |
FDCCCE | 1.95 (0.18) | 2.01 (0.27) | 0.004 * | 0.501 |
FDCECE | 1.98 (0.17) | 2.02 (0.26) | 0.031 * | 0.796 |
TPOWERRDCE | 12.27 (10.66) | 12.94 (10.68) | 0.280 | 0.780 |
TPOWERMLCE | 19.79 (21.94) | 25.63 (26.64) | 0.007 * | 0.642 |
TPOWERAPCE | 20.89 (14.7) | 20.88 (15.75) | 0.996 | 0.996 |
POWER50RDCE | 0.57 (0.12) | 0.66 (0.38) | 0.010 * | 0.495 |
POWER50MLCE | 0.4 (0.1) | 0.39 (0.13) | 0.293 | 0.793 |
POWER50APCE | 0.54 (0.17) | 0.54 (0.28) | 0.008 * | 0.470 |
POWER95RDCE | 2.26 (0.64) | 2.3 (0.95) | 0.854 | 0.817 |
POWER95MLCE | 1.5 (0.82) | 1.59 (0.99) | 0.590 | 0.225 |
POWER95APCE | 2.04 (0.81) | 2.09 (0.84) | 0.685 | 0.754 |
CFREQRDCE | 1.08 (0.23) | 1.14 (0.48) | 0.115 | 0.487 |
CFREQMLCE | 0.74 (0.25) | 0.79 (0.36) | 0.071 | 0.347 |
CFREQAPCE | 0.99 (0.3) | 1.04 (0.42) | 0.054 | 0.524 |
FREQDRDCE | 0.66 (0.03) | 0.65 (0.05) | 0.455 | 0.287 |
FREQDMLCE | 0.64 (0.07) | 0.65 (0.07) | 0.698 | 0.752 |
FREQDAPCE | 0.66 (0.03) | 0.66 (0.04) | 0.719 | 0.574 |
CoP Indices | Correlation Coefficient | p-Value Correlation Coefficient | ICC (IC 95%) |
---|---|---|---|
RDOE | 0.791 | 0.000 * | 0.787 (0.502–0.919) |
MDISTOE | 0.791 | 0.000 * | 0.787(0.502–0.919) |
MDISTMLOE | 0.857 | 0.000 * | 0.832 (0.563–0.939) |
MDISTAPOE | 0.606 | 0.013 * | 0.612 (0.182–0.845) |
RDISTOE | 0.826 | 0.000 * | 0.882 (0.572–0.993) |
RDISTMLOE | 0.880 | 0.000 * | 0.883 (0.640–0.951) |
RDISTAPOE | 0.680 | 0.004 * | 0.683 (0.292–0.877) |
RANGEOE | 0.794 | 0.000 * | 0.799 (0.510–0.925) |
RANGEMLOE | 0.843 | 0.000 * | 0.834 (0.597–0.938) |
RANGEAPOE | 0.792 | 0.000 * | 0.745 (0.423–0.902) |
MVELOE | 0.629 | 0.009 * | 0.743 (0.491–0.995) |
MVELMLOE | 0.926 | 0.000 * | 0.920 (0.792–0.971) |
MVELAPOE | 0.594 | 0.015 * | 0.628 (0.263–0.993) |
sRDOE | 0.879 | 0.000 * | 0.868 (0.664–0.952) |
sAPMLOE | -0.118 | 0.662 | 0.086 (0.000–0.577) |
AREACCOE | 0.774 | 0.000 * | 0.817 (0.637–0.996) |
AREACEOE | 0.807 | 0.000 * | 0.815 (0.545–0.932) |
AREASWOE | 0.779 | 0.000 * | 0.788 (0.581–0.995) |
MFREQOE | 0.759 | 0.001 * | 0.627 (0.261–0.993) |
MFREQMLOE | 0.714 | 0.002 * | 0.719 (0.356–0.893) |
MFREQAPOE | 0.668 | 0.005 * | 0.561(0.131–0.991) |
FDPDOE | 0.780 | 0.000 * | 0.772 (0.455–0.995) |
FDCCOE | 0.802 | 0.000 * | 0.746 (0.406–0.904) |
FDCEOE | 0.765 | 0.001 * | 0.687 (0.380–0.994) |
TPOWERRDOE | 0.697 | 0.003 * | 0.660 (0.330–0.990) |
TPOWERMLOE | 0.854 | 0.000 * | 0.859 (0.640–0.949) |
TPOWERAPOE | 0.697 | 0.003 * | 0.590 (0.187–0.992) |
POWER50RDOE | 0.545 | 0.029 * | 0.409 (0.000–0.989) |
POWER50MLOE | 0.415 | 0.110 | 0.492 (0.000–0.990) |
POWER50APOE | 0.451 | 0.080 | 0.426 (0.000–0.753) |
POWER95RDOE | 0.884 | 0.000 * | 0.869 (0.665–0.952) |
POWER95MLOE | 0.604 | 0.013 * | 0.817 (0.638–0.996) |
POWER95APOE | 0.805 | 0.000 * | 0.788 (0.489–0.920) |
CFREQRDOE | 0.759 | 0.001 * | 0.792 (0.588–0.995) |
CFREQMLOE | 0.836 | 0.000 * | 0.834 (0.594–0.939) |
CFREQAPOE | 0.825 | 0.000 * | 0.734 (0.400–0.898) |
FREQDRDOE | 0.293 | 0.272 | 0.300 (0.000–0.687) |
FREQDMLOE | 0.779 | 0.000 * | 0.762 (0.450–0.909) |
FREQDAPOE | 0.187 | 0.489 | 0.183 (0.000–0.608) |
RDCE | 0.697 | 0.003 * | 0.789 (0.574–0.995) |
MDISTCE | 0.677 | 0.003 * | 0.784 (0.573–0.996) |
MDISTMLCE | 0.602 | 0.014 * | 0.581 (0.162–0.828) |
MDISTAPCE | 0.851 | 0.000 * | 0.851 (0.629–0.945) |
RDISTCE | 0.641 | 0.007 * | 0.780 (0.566–0.995) |
RDISTMLCE | 0.629 | 0.009 * | 0.608 (0.201–0.840) |
RDISTAPCE | 0.851 | 0.000 * | 0.852 (0.629–0.945) |
RANGECE | 0.729 | 0.001 * | 0.734 (0.387–0.898) |
RANGEMLCE | 0.549 | 0.028 * | 0.518 (0.078–0.796) |
RANGEAPCE | 0.784 | 0.000 * | 0.763 (0.445–0.910) |
MVELCE | 0.809 | 0.000 * | 0.788 (0.503–0.920) |
MVELMLCE | 0.677 | 0.004 * | 0.665 (0.288–0.867) |
MVELAPCE | 0.776 | 0.000 * | 0.809 (0.622–0.996) |
sRDCE | 0.689 | 0.003 * | 0.700 (0.324–0.884) |
sAPMLCE | 0.645 | 0.007 * | 0.578 (0.136–0.829) |
AREACCCE | 0.665 | 0.005 * | 0.622 (0.253–0.991) |
AREACECE | 0.694 | 0.003 * | 0.599 (0.205–0.992) |
AREASWCE | 0.771 | 0.000 * | 0.665 (0.337–0.993) |
MFREQCE | 0.656 | 0.006 * | 0.387 (0.000–0.989) |
MFREQMLCE | 0.803 | 0.000 * | 0.786 (0.485–0.920) |
MFREQAPCE | 0.515 | 0.041 * | 0.315 (0.000–0.986) |
FDPDCE | 0.337 | 0.150 | 0.336 (0.000–0.701) |
FDCCCE | 0.579 | 0.019 * | 0.413 (0.000–0.984) |
FDCECE | 0.771 | 0.000 * | 0.648 (0.303–0.993) |
TPOWERRDCE | 0.615 | 0.011 * | 0.629 (0.200–0.854) |
TPOWERMLCE | 0.732 | 0.001 * | 0.441 (0.000–0.990) |
TPOWERAPCE | 0.753 | 0.001 * | 0.763 (0.438–0.911) |
POWER50RDCE | 0.283 | 0.288 | 0.257 (0.000–0.986) |
POWER50MLCE | 0.200 | 0.457 | 0.204 (0.000–0.633) |
POWER50APCE | 0.708 | 0.002 * | 0.488 (0.000–0.990) |
POWER95RDCE | 0.642 | 0.007 * | 0.611 (0.170–0.846) |
POWER95MLCE | 0.966 | 0.000 * | 0.948 (0.862–0.982) |
POWER95APCE | 0.788 | 0.000 * | 0.797(0.509–0.924) |
CFREQRDCE | 0.640 | 0.008 * | 0.511 (0.037–0.797) |
CFREQMLCE | 0.873 | 0.000 * | 0.819 (0.565–0.932) |
CFREQAPCE | 0.802 | 0.000 * | 0.763 (0.447–0.910) |
FREQDRDCE | 0.487 | 0.056 | 0.431 (0.000–0.753) |
FREQDMLCE | 0.294 | 0.269 | 0.306 (0.000–0.692) |
FREQDAPCE | 0.084 | 0.757 | 0.083 (0.000–0.552) |
Appendix D
CoP Indices | Rater 1 Mean (SD) | Rater 2 Mean (SD) | Rater 3 Mean (SD) | p-Value Shapiro–Wilk Test | p-Value Mauchly Test | p-Value Means Difference Test |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RDOE | 13,058.98 (4666.8) | 13,137.28 (4445.82) | 13,303.54 (5218.12) | 0.001 * | - | 0.739 |
MDISTOE | 5.44 (1.94) | 5.47 (1.85) | 5.54 (2.17) | 0.001 * | - | 0.739 |
MDISTMLOE | 3.32 (1.42) | 3.27 (1.41) | 3.26 (1.55) | 0.000 * | - | 0.850 |
MDISTAPOE | 3.57 (1.28) | 3.69 (1.4) | 3.74 (1.59) | 0.002 * | - | 0.911 |
RDISTOE | 6.26 (2.31) | 6.24 (2.1) | 6.39 (2.51) | 0.000 * | - | 0.559 |
RDISTMLOE | 4.27 (1.91) | 4.06 (1.69) | 4.15 (1.98) | 0.000 * | - | 0.643 |
RDISTAPOE | 4.48 (1.6) | 4.59 (1.7) | 4.7 (1.96) | 0.005 * | - | 0.911 |
RANGEOE | 30.32 (16.01) | 29.17 (10.93) | 30.57 (13.21) | 0.021 * | - | 0.614 |
RANGEMLOE | 25.38 (15.41) | 22.37 (9.53) | 24.19 (13) | 0.011 * | - | 0.559 |
RANGEAPOE | 24.67 (9.47) | 24.89 (9.29) | 25.84 (10.76) | 0.028 * | - | 0.911 |
MVELOE | 17.02 (8.98) | 15.88 (8.48) | 15.74 (8.08) | 0.000 * | - | 0.368 |
MVELMLOE | 9.02 (3.8) | 8.58 (4.09) | 8.94 (5.07) | 0.000 * | - | 0.327 |
MVELAPOE | 12.37 (7.77) | 11.44 (7.07) | 10.93 (5.84) | 0.000 * | - | 0.404 |
sRDOE | 3.04 (1.37) | 2.98 (1.03) | 3.16 (1.3) | 0.000 * | - | 0.521 |
sAPMLOE | −0.3 (6.98) | 0.56 (9.96) | 1.78 (5.86) | 0.014 * | - | 0.231 |
AREACCOE | 393.14 (311.15) | 376.14 (291.78) | 418.76 (346.14) | 0.000 * | - | 0.811 |
AREACEOE | 381.28 (284.2) | 351.21 (282.74) | 394.51 (330.28) | 0.000 * | - | 0.739 |
AREASWOE | 32.94 (27.16) | 30.43 (30.14) | 31.51 (33.39) | 0.000 * | - | 0.320 |
MFREQOE | 0.51 (0.25) | 0.46 (0.18) | 0.45 (0.13) | 0.827 | 0.003 * | 0.050 * |
MFREQMLOE | 0.52 (0.21) | 0.49 (0.16) | 0.5 (0.16) | 0.314 | 0.163 | 0.532 |
MFREQAPOE | 0.62 (0.37) | 0.55 (0.27) | 0.53 (0.18) | 0.533 | 0.052 | 0.106 |
FDPDOE | 1.73 (0.14) | 1.71 (0.13) | 1.70 (0.11) | 0.342 | 0.711 | 0.105 |
FDCCOE | 1.88 (0.19) | 1.84 (0.16) | 1.84 (0.12) | 0.166 | 0.137 | 0.096 |
FDCEOE | 1.88 (0.19) | 1.86 (0.15) | 1.85 (0.13) | 0.926 | 0.019 * | 0.092 |
TPOWERRDOE | 6.65 (5.67) | 5.86 (5.01) | 7.42 (7.04) | 0.000 * | - | 0.534 |
TPOWERMLOE | 10.03 (8.78) | 8.62 (10.03) | 10.4 (13.03) | 0.000 * | - | 0.811 |
TPOWERAPOE | 10.31 (9.12) | 10.09 (10.49) | 12.01 (13.45) | 0.000 * | - | 0.643 |
POWER50RDOE | 0.51 (0.18) | 0.5 (0.15) | 0.47 (0.14) | 0.209 | 0.021 * | 0.119 |
POWER50MLOE | 0.42 (0.14) | 0.41 (0.11) | 0.38 (0.1) | 0.211 | 0.061 | 0.172 |
POWER50APOE | 0.47 (0.17) | 0.43 (0.13) | 0.4 (0.12) | 0.162 | 0.456 | 0.017 * |
POWER95RDOE | 1.81 (0.63) | 1.85 (0.64) | 1.79 (0.51) | 0.471 | 0.236 | 0.780 |
POWER95MLOE | 1.29 (0.5) | 1.3 (0.48) | 1.31 (0.35) | 0.178 | 0.565 | 0.924 |
POWER95APOE | 1.61 (0.77) | 1.59 (0.63) | 1.51 (0.54) | 0.223 | 0.655 | 0.478 |
CFREQRDOE | 0.91 (0.28) | 0.92 (0.27) | 0.89 (0.22) | 0.015 * | - | 0.404 |
CFREQMLOE | 0.69 (0.21) | 0.69 (0.19) | 0.67 (0.15) | 0.990 | 0.105 | 0.703 |
CFREQAPOE | 0.83 (0.33) | 0.79 (0.25) | 0.76 (0.21) | 0.369 | 0.117 | 0.171 |
FREQDRDOE | 0.64 (0.04) | 0.64 (0.03) | 0.65 (0.04) | 0.799 | 0.464 | 0.170 |
FREQDMLOE | 0.6 (0.05) | 0.61 (0.04) | 0.63 (0.05) | 0.106 | 0.513 | 0.024 * |
FREQDAPOE | 0.64 (0.05) | 0.65 (0.04) | 0.66 (0.05) | 0.845 | 0.742 | 0.040 * |
RDCE | 17,296.17 (6462.15) | 16,478.23 (6700.75) | 16,437.95 (6259.03) | 0.177 | 0.008 * | 0.470 |
MDISTCE | 7.2 (2.69) | 6.86 (2.79) | 6.84 (2.6) | 0.177 | 0.008 * | 0.470 |
MDISTMLCE | 4.55 (2.14) | 4.36 (2.09) | 4.18 (2.02) | 0.540 | 0.043 * | 0.395 |
MDISTAPCE | 4.6 (1.69) | 4.34 (1.71) | 4.48 (1.65) | 0.916 | 0.096 | 0.414 |
RDISTCE | 8.22 (3.11) | 7.88 (3.15) | 7.88 (2.98) | 0.174 | 0.015 * | 0.565 |
RDISTMLCE | 5.67 (2.68) | 5.5 (2.61) | 5.32 (2.53) | 0.350 | 0.033 * | 0.559 |
RDISTAPCE | 5.78 (2.13) | 5.51 (2.14) | 5.65 (2.09) | 0.536 | 0.090 | 0.515 |
RANGECE | 38.13 (15.11) | 37.76 (15.42) | 38.45 (15.66) | 0.895 | 0.063 | 0.958 |
RANGEMLCE | 31.05 (14.78) | 31.14 (14.65) | 30.89 (14.76) | 0.658 | 0.016 * | 0.985 |
RANGEAPCE | 33.05 (13.42) | 32.77 (13.53) | 33.22 (14.29) | 0.146 | 0.165 | 0.979 |
MVELCE | 24.58 (12.71) | 23.4 (11.36) | 24.24 (15.06) | 0.000 * | - | 0.977 |
MVELMLCE | 13.27 (6.89) | 13.19 (6.82) | 13.15 (8.9) | 0.000 * | - | 0.739 |
MVELAPCE | 17.64 (10.32) | 16.3 (8.69) | 17.32 (10.98) | 0.000 * | - | 0.739 |
sRDCE | 3.94 (1.61) | 3.85 (1.5) | 3.89 (1.49) | 0.424 | 0.110 | 0.866 |
sAPMLCE | −1.05 (9.57) | −0.48 (13.63) | −0.7 (8.4) | 0.006 * | - | 0.298 |
AREACCCE | 675.17 (529.15) | 631.34 (506.34) | 628.7 (433.01) | 0.599 | 0.018 * | 0.720 |
AREACECE | 659.68 (539.88) | 628.36 (497.18) | 606.75 (428.13) | 0.944 | 0.015 * | 0.702 |
AREASWCE | 63.54 (54.17) | 60.29 (55.83) | 60.86 (61.35) | 0.000 * | - | 0.850 |
MFREQCE | 0.55 (0.25) | 0.55 (0.17) | 0.57 (0.23) | 0.009 * | - | 0.433 |
MFREQMLCE | 0.55 (0.24) | 0.56 (0.19) | 0.56 (0.2) | 0.315 | 0.114 | 0.870 |
MFREQAPCE | 0.69 (0.36) | 0.68 (0.28) | 0.69 (0.33) | 0.004 * | - | 0.850 |
FDPDCE | 1.78 (0.15) | 1.76 (0.13) | 1.76 (0.13) | 0.991 | 0.083 | 0.483 |
FDCCCE | 1.93 (0.2) | 1.92 (0.15) | 1.93 (0.18) | 0.257 | 0.996 | 0.961 |
FDCECE | 1.93 (0.2) | 1.93 (0.15) | 1.94 (0.18) | 0.026 * | - | 0.739 |
TPOWERRDCE | 11.47 (9.05) | 11.18 (9.65) | 10.6 (8.64) | 0.003 * | - | 0.643 |
TPOWERMLCE | 20.93 (23.84) | 21.43 (28.32) | 17.82 (21.91) | 0.000 * | - | 0.811 |
TPOWERAPCE | 20.44 (18.44) | 19.18 (23.21) | 19.05 (17.26) | 0.000 * | - | 0.521 |
POWER50RDCE | 0.52 (0.16) | 0.55 (0.14) | 0.54 (0.16) | 0.021 * | - | 0.452 |
POWER50MLCE | 0.41 (0.14) | 0.41 (0.13) | 0.42 (0.12) | 0.261 | 0.589 | 0.897 |
POWER50APCE | 0.44 (0.15) | 0.46 (0.14) | 0.45 (0.15) | 0.003 * | - | 0.180 |
POWER95RDCE | 1.98 (0.69) | 2.04 (0.6) | 2.06 (0.69) | 0.185 | 0.035 * | 0.429 |
POWER95MLCE | 1.36 (0.54) | 1.42 (0.46) | 1.43 (0.42) | 0.674 | 0.128 | 0.444 |
POWER95APCE | 1.71 (0.76) | 1.74 (0.65) | 1.71 (0.69) | 0.025 * | - | 0.959 |
CFREQRDCE | 0.97 (0.28) | 1 (0.25) | 1 (0.26) | 0.037 * | - | 0.211 |
CFREQMLCE | 0.71 (0.23) | 0.74 (0.19) | 0.74 (0.18) | 0.287 | 0.009 * | 0.477 |
CFREQAPCE | 0.84 (0.3) | 0.87 (0.28) | 0.84 (0.26) | 0.007 * | - | 0.811 |
FREQDRDCE | 0.65 (0.04) | 0.64 (0.03) | 0.64 (0.04) | 0.232 | 0.129 | 0.880 |
FREQDMLCE | 0.61 (0.05) | 0.63 (0.05) | 0.62 (0.05) | 0.558 | 0.126 | 0.149 |
FREQDAPCE | 0.66 (0.06) | 0.65 (0.05) | 0.65 (0.05) | 0.733 | 0.417 | 0.816 |
Cop Indices | ICC(2,1) (CI 95%) | Correlation Coefficient (p-Value) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Test 1–Test 2 | Test 1–Test 3 | Test 2–Test 3 | ||
RDOE | 0.714 (0.555–0.874) | 0.612 (0.000 *) | 0.635 (0.000 *) | 0.802 (0.000 *) |
MDISTOE | 0.714 (0.541–0.888) | 0.612 (0.000 *) | 0.635 (0.000 *) | 0.802 (0.000 *) |
MDISTMLOE | 0.665 (0.473–0.858) | 0.564 (0.000 *) | 0.591 (0.000 *) | 0.718 (0.000 *) |
MDISTAPOE | 0.549 (0.295–0.803) | 0.419 (0.005 *) | 0.486 (0.001 *) | 0.633 (0.000 *) |
RDISTOE | 0.722 (0.558–0.886) | 0.624 (0.000 *) | 0.622 (0.000 *) | 0.760 (0.000 *) |
RDISTMLOE | 0.631 (0.392–0.871) | 0.577 (0.000 *) | 0.574 (0.000 *) | 0.698 (0.000 *) |
RDISTAPOE | 0.571 (0.324–0.817) | 0.487 (0.001 *) | 0.543 (0.000 *) | 0.629 (0.000 *) |
RANGEOE | 0.603 (0.439–0.743) | 0.646 (0.000 *) | 0.551 (0.000 *) | 0.544 (0.000 *) |
RANGEMLOE | 0.432 (0.118–0.746) | 0.576 (0.000 *) | 0.529 (0.000 *) | 0.612 (0.000 *) |
RANGEAPOE | 0.686 (0.533–0.840) | 0.599 (0.000 *) | 0.649 (0.000 *) | 0.551 (0.000 *) |
MVELOE | 0.789 (0.676–0.901) | 0.782 (0.000 *) | 0.724 (0.000 *) | 0.719 (0.000 *) |
MVELMLOE | 0.739 (0.594–0.884) | 0.645 (0.000 *) | 0.720 (0.000 *) | 0.597 (0.000 *) |
MVELAPOE | 0.789 (0.665–0.914) | 0.844 (0.000 *) | 0.815 (0.000 *) | 0.866 (0.000 *) |
sRDOE | 0.639 (0.441–0.836) | 0.643 (0.000 *) | 0.594 (0.000 *) | 0.645 (0.000 *) |
sAPMLOE | 0.047 (0.000–0.585) | 0.072 (0.649) | 0.333 (0.029 *) | 0.132(0.400) |
AREACCOE | 0.717 (0.569–0.865) | 0.623 (0.000 *) | 0.598 (0.000 *) | 0.720 (0.000 *) |
AREACEOE | 0.732 (0.583–0.880) | 0.684 (0.000 *) | 0.613 (0.000 *) | 0.697 (0.000 *) |
AREASWOE | 0.768 (0.604–0.932) | 0.730 (0.000 *) | 0.666 (0.000 *) | 0.638 (0.000 *) |
MFREQOE | 0.652 (0.500–0.778) | 0.773 (0.000 *) | 0.679 (0.000 *) | 0.754 (0.000 *) |
MFREQMLOE | 0.656 (0.506–0.781) | 0.643 (0.000 *) | 0.681 (0.000 *) | 0.697 (0.000 *) |
MFREQAPOE | 0.584 (0.417–0.728) | 0.731 (0.000 *) | 0.610 (0.000 *) | 0.613 (0.000 *) |
FDPDOE | 0.629 (0.473–0.761) | 0.722 (0.000 *) | 0.612 (0.000 *) | 0.591 (0.000 *) |
FDCCOE | 0.712 (0.576–0.820) | 0.765 (0.000 *) | 0.716 (0.000 *) | 0.776 (0.000 *) |
FDCEOE | 0.745 (0.620–0.842) | 0.783 (0.000 *) | 0.740 (0.000 *) | 0.825 (0.000 *) |
TPOWERRDOE | 0.663 (0.482–0.844) | 0.777 (0.000 *) | 0.701 (0.000 *) | 0.613 (0.000 *) |
TPOWERMLOE | 0.655 (0.413–0.898) | 0.671 (0.000 *) | 0.696 (0.000 *) | 0.711 (0.000 *) |
TPOWERAPOE | 0.706 (0.557–0.855) | 0.740 (0.000 *) | 0.767 (0.000 *) | 0.709 (0.000 *) |
POWER50RDOE | 0.639 (0.484–0.768) | 0.789 (0.000 *) | 0.537 (0.000 *) | 0.621 (0.000 *) |
POWER50MLOE | 0.516 (0.341–0.677) | 0.691 (0.000 *) | 0.434 (0.004 *) | 0.486 (0.001 *) |
POWER50APOE | 0.556 (0.382–0.708) | 0.602 (0.000 *) | 0.609 (0.000 *) | 0.570 (0.000 *) |
POWER95RDOE | 0.663 (0.513–0.786) | 0.762 (0.000 *) | 0.658 (0.000 *) | 0.565 (0.000 *) |
POWER95MLOE | 0.728 (0.596–0.830) | 0.799 (0.000 *) | 0.763 (0.000 *) | 0.661 (0.000 *) |
POWER95APOE | 0.659 (0.508–0.783) | 0.688 (0.000 *) | 0.697 (0.000 *) | 0.642 (0.000 *) |
CFREQRDOE | 0.739 (0.582–0.895) | 0.715 (0.000 *) | 0.574 (0.000 *) | 0.533 (0.000 *) |
CFREQMLOE | 0.702 (0.563–0.813) | 0.830 (0.000 *) | 0.665 (0.000 *) | 0.624 (0.000 *) |
CFREQAPOE | 0.720 (0.588–0.825) | 0.795 (0.000 *) | 0.746 (0.000 *) | 0.750 (0.000 *) |
FREQDRDOE | 0.482 (0.303–0.650) | 0.500 (0.001 *) | 0.572 (0.000 *) | 0.389 (0.010 *) |
FREQDMLOE | 0.424 (0.241–0.602) | 0.527 (0.000 *) | 0.490 (0.001 *) | 0.298 (0.053) |
FREQDAPOE | 0.608 (0.445–0.746) | 0.575 (0.000 *) | 0.653 (0.000 *) | 0.672 (0.000 *) |
RDCE | 0.663 (0.514–0.786) | 0.800 (0.000 *) | 0.655 (0.000 *) | 0.527 (0.000 *) |
MDISTCE | 0.663 (0.514–0.786) | 0.800 (0.000 *) | 0.655 (0.000 *) | 0.527 (0.000 *) |
MDISTMLCE | 0.647 (0.494–0.774) | 0.785 (0.000 *) | 0.600 (0.000 *) | 0.549 (0.000 *) |
MDISTAPCE | 0.670 (0.522–0.790) | 0.717 (0.000 *) | 0.729 (0.000 *) | 0.559 (0.000 *) |
RDISTCE | 0.666 (0.517–0.788) | 0.798 (0.000 *) | 0.652 (0.000 *) | 0.536 (0.000 *) |
RDISTMLCE | 0.644 (0.490 -0.772) | 0.788 (0.000 *) | 0.581 (0.000 *) | 0.550 (0.000 *) |
RDISTAPCE | 0.673 (0.527–0.793) | 0.738 (0.000 *) | 0.714 (0.000 *) | 0.560 (0.000 *) |
RANGECE | 0.609 (0.455–0.747) | 0.725 (0.000 *) | 0.594 (0.000 *) | 0.496 (0.001 *) |
RANGEMLCE | 0.598 (0.432–0.740) | 0.766 (0.000 *) | 0.497 (0.001 *) | 0.515 (0.000 *) |
RANGEAPCE | 0.580 (0.410–0.726) | 0.643 (0.000 *) | 0.619 (0.000 *) | 0.467 (0.002 *) |
MVELCE | 0.724 (0.567–0.880) | 0.734 (0.000 *) | 0.800 (0.000 *) | 0.706 (0.000 *) |
MVELMLCE | 0.684 (0.495–0.872) | 0.749 (0.000 *) | 0.762 (0.000 *) | 0.764 (0.000 *) |
MVELAPCE | 0.752 (0.594–0.911) | 0.788 (0.000 *) | 0.838 (0.000 *) | 0.696 (0.000 *) |
sRDCE | 0.635 (0.477–0.766) | 0.752 (0.000 *) | 0.613 (0.000 *) | 0.519 (0.000 *) |
sAPMLCE | 0.276 (0.000–0.667) | 0.276 (0.073) | 0.174 (0.264) | 0.213 (0.171) |
AREACCCE | 0.571 (0.401–0.720) | 0.752 (0.000 *) | 0.618 (0.000 *) | 0.341 (0.025 *) |
AREACECE | 0.587 (0.420–0.731) | 0.768 (0.000 *) | 0.597 (0.000 *) | 0.363 (0.017 *) |
AREASWCE | 0.581 (0.312–0.850) | 0.829 (0.000 *) | 0.709 (0.000 *) | 0.698 (0.000 *) |
MFREQCE | 0.732 (0.584–0.880) | 0.742 (0.000 *) | 0.800 (0.000 *) | 0.659 (0.000 *) |
MFREQMLCE | 0.606 (0.442–0.745) | 0.633 (0.000 *) | 0.557 (0.000 *) | 0.662 (0.000 *) |
MFREQAPCE | 0.819 (0.711–0.927) | 0.753 (0.000 *) | 0.849 (0.000 *) | 0.689 (0.000 *) |
FDPDCE | 0.751 (0.628–0.846) | 0.834 (0.000 *) | 0.702 (0.000 *) | 0.741 (0.000 *) |
FDCCCE | 0.766 (0.648–0.856) | 0.804 (0.000 *) | 0.788 (0.000 *) | 0.730 (0.000 *) |
FDCECE | 0.742 (0.595–0.890) | 0.793 (0.000 *) | 0.806 (0.000 *) | 0.701 (0.000 *) |
TPOWERRDCE | 0.499 (0.202–0.796) | 0.685 (0.000 *) | 0.597 (0.000 *) | 0.708 (0.000 *) |
TPOWERMLCE | 0.320 (0.000–0.716) | 0.728 (0.000 *) | 0.659 (0.000 *) | 0.714 (0.000 *) |
TPOWERAPCE | 0.370 (0.000–0.745) | 0.629 (0.000 *) | 0.641 (0.000 *) | 0.612 (0.000 *) |
POWER50RDCE | 0.511 (0.270–0.752) | 0.419 (0.006 *) | 0.558 (0.000 *) | 0.598 (0.000 *) |
POWER50MLCE | 0.550 (0.376–0.704) | 0.642 (0.000 *) | 0.497 (0.001 *) | 0.495 (0.001 *) |
POWER50APCE | 0.762 (0.622–0.902) | 0.743 (0.000 *) | 0.769 (0.000 *) | 0.744 (0.000 *) |
POWER95RDCE | 0.774 (0.660–0.861) | 0.860 (0.000 *) | 0.777 (0.000 *) | 0.697 (0.000 *) |
POWER95MLCE | 0.725 (0.594–0.828) | 0.827 (0.000 *) | 0.680 (0.000 *) | 0.687 (0.000 *) |
POWER95APCE | 0.809 (0.701–0.918) | 0.746 (0.000 *) | 0.813 (0.000 *) | 0.736 (0.000 *) |
CFREQRDCE | 0.746 (0.606–0.885) | 0.707 (0.000 *) | 0.756 (0.000 *) | 0.683 (0.000 *) |
CFREQMLCE | 0.711 (0.575–0.819) | 0.845 (0.000 *) | 0.631 (0.000 *) | 0.681 (0.000 *) |
CFREQAPCE | 0.825 (0.717–0.934) | 0.743 (0.000 *) | 0.824 (0.000 *) | 0.753 (0.000 *) |
FREQDRDCE | 0.485 (0.303–0.654) | 0.471 (0.005 *) | 0.471 (0.005 *) | 0.622 (0.000 *) |
FREQDMLCE | 0.606 (0.444–0.744) | 0.713 (0.000 *) | 0.489 (0.000 *) | 0.623 (0.000 *) |
FREQDAPCE | 0.568 (0.397–0.717) | 0.640 (0.000 *) | 0.519 (0.000 *) | 0.547 (0.000 *) |
References
- Peterka, R.J. Sensory Integration for Human Balance Control. Handb. Clin. Neurol. 2018, 159, 27–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Matsumura, B.A.; Ambrose, A.F. Balance in the Elderly. Clin. Geriatr. Med. 2006, 22, 395–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Noh, J.W.; Kim, K.B.; Lee, J.H.; Lee, B.H.; Kwon, Y.D.; Heui Lee, S. The Elderly and Falls: Factors Associated with Quality of Life A Cross-Sectional Study Using Large-Scale National Data in Korea. Arch. Gerontol. Geriatr. 2017, 73, 279–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- WHO. WHO Global Report on Falls Prevention in Older Age; WHO Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data: Geneva, Switzerland, 2007; ISBN 978 92 4 156353 6. [Google Scholar]
- Oliver, D.; Daly, F.; Martin, F.C.; McMurdo, M.E.T. Risk Factors and Risk Assessment Tools for Falls in Hospital In-Patients: A Systematic Review. Age Ageing 2004, 33, 122–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cost of Older Adult Falls | Home and Recreational Safety | CDC Injury Center. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/homeandrecreationalsafety/falls/data/fallcost.html (accessed on 11 April 2021).
- Florence, C.S.; Bergen, G.; Atherly, A.; Burns, E.; Stevens, J.; Drake, C. Medical Costs of Fatal and Nonfatal Falls in Older Adults. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 2018, 66, 693–698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mancini, M.; Horak, F.B. The Relevance of Clinical Balance Assessment Tools to Differentiate Balance Deficits. Eur. J. Phys. Rehabil. Med. 2010, 46, 239. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Park, S.H. Tools for Assessing Fall Risk in the Elderly: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Aging Clin. Exp. Res. 2018, 30, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Renfro, M.; Maring, J.; Bainbridge, D.; Blair, M. Fall Risk among Older Adult High-Risk Populations: A Review of Current Screening and Assessment Tools. Curr. Geriatr. Rep. 2016, 5, 160–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, B.; Liu, P.; Xiao, F.; Liu, Z.; Wang, Y. Review of the Upright Balance Assessment Based on the Force Plate. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 2696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bonnechère, B.; Jansen, B.; van Sint Jan, S. Cost-Effective (Gaming) Motion and Balance Devices for Functional Assessment: Need or Hype? J. Biomech. 2016, 49, 2561–2565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goble, D.J.; Cone, B.L.; Fling, B.W. Using the Wii Fit as a Tool for Balance Assessment and Neurorehabilitation: The First Half Decade of “Wii-Search”. J. Neuroeng. Rehabil. 2014, 11, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Young, W.; Ferguson, S.; Brault, S.; Craig, C. Assessing and Training Standing Balance in Older Adults: A Novel Approach Using the “Nintendo Wii” Balance Board. Gait Posture 2011, 33, 303–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sgrò, F.; Monteleone, G.; Pavone, M.; Lipoma, M. Validity Analysis of Wii Balance Board Versus Baropodometer Platform Using an Open Custom Integrated Application. AASRI Procedia 2014, 8, 22–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kennedy, M.W.; Schmiedeler, J.P.; Crowell, C.R.; Villano, M.; Striegel, A.D.; Kuitse, J. Enhanced Feedback in Balance Rehabilitation Using the Nintendo Wii Balance Board. In Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE 13th International Conference on e-Health Networking, Applications and Services, HEALTHCOM 2011, Columbia, MO, USA, 13–15 June 2011; pp. 162–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Menzies, R.J.; Rogers, S.J.; Phillips, A.M.; Chiarovano, E.; de Waele, C.; Verstraten, F.A.J.; MacDougall, H. An Objective Measure for the Visual Fidelity of Virtual Reality and the Risks of Falls in a Virtual Environment. Virtual Real. 2016, 20, 173–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clark, R.A.; Bryant, A.L.; Pua, Y.; McCrory, P.; Bennell, K.; Hunt, M. Validity and Reliability of the Nintendo Wii Balance Board for Assessment of Standing Balance. Gait Posture 2010, 31, 307–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clark, R.A.; Mentiplay, B.F.; Pua, Y.H.; Bower, K.J. Reliability and Validity of the Wii Balance Board for Assessment of Standing Balance: A Systematic Review. Gait Posture 2018, 61, 40–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Estévez-Pedraza, Á.G.; Martínez-Méndez, R.; Portillo-Rodríguez, O.; Parra-Rodríguez, L. Portable Device for the Measurement and Assessment of the Human Equilibrium. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 2020, 49, 933–945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pivnickova, L.; Dolinay, V.; Vasek, V. Evaluation of Static Posturography via the Wii Balance Board. In Proceedings of the 2014 15th International Carpathian Control Conference, ICCC 2014, Velke Karlovice, Czech Republic, 28–30 May 2014; IEEE Computer Society: Washington, DC, USA, 2014; pp. 437–441. [Google Scholar]
- Nagymate, G.; Vamos, B.; Kiss, R.M. Validation of the Nintendo Wii Balance Board for Stabilometry Measurements. In Proceedings of the 2016 International Symposium on Small-Scale Intelligent Manufacturing Systems, SIMS 2016, Narvik, Norway, 21–24 June 2016; Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2016; pp. 111–114. [Google Scholar]
- Leach, J.M.; Mancini, M.; Peterka, R.J.; Hayes, T.L.; Horak, F.B. Validating and Calibrating the Nintendo Wii Balance Board to Derive Reliable Center of Pressure Measures. Sensors 2014, 14, 18244–18267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Monteiro-Junior, R.; Ferreira, A.; Puell, V.; Lattari, E.; Machado, S.; Otero Vaghetti, C.; da Silva, E. Wii Balance Board: Reliability and Clinical Use in Assessment of Balance in Healthy Elderly Women. CNS Neurol. Disord. Drug Targets 2015, 14, 1165–1170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pagnacco, G.; Bundle, M.W.; Carrick, F.R.; Wright, C.H.G.; Oggero, E. Comments to the Replies to the to Letter to the Editor “Validity and Reliability of the Nintendo Wii Balance Board for Assessment of Standing Balance” by R.A. Clark et al. [Gait & Posture 31 (2010) 307–310]: Are the Conclusions Stated by the Authors Justified? Gait Posture 2014, 39, 1158–1161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zabjek, K. Emerging Technology within the Field of Active Gaming: Towards the Establishment of Evidence. Gait Posture 2014, 39, 1157–1158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Young, W.R. We Need a Balanced Perspective in Wii-Search. Gait Posture 2014, 39, 1156–1157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Reed-Jones, R.J. Current Limitations of the Wii’s Validity and What Should Be Considered for the Future. Gait Posture 2014, 39, 1155–1156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bingham, J.T. Technology from Non-Traditional Sources Should Not Be Immune from Scientific Rigor. Gait Posture 2014, 39, 1154–1155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stoffregen, T.A.; Bardy, B.G. When the WBB Is Useful, and When It Isn’t. Gait Posture 2014, 39, 1154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clark, R.A.; Hunt, M.; Bryant, A.L.; Pua, Y.-H. Author Response to the Letter: On “Validity and Reliability of the Nintendo Wii Balance Board for Assessment of Standing Balance”: Are the Conclusions Stated by the Authors Justified? Gait Posture 2014, 39, 1151–1154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pagnacco, G.; Bundle, M.W.; Carrick, F.R.; Wright, C.H.G.; Oggero, E. Letter to the Editor: On “Validity and Reliability of the Nintendo Wii Balance Board for Assessment of Standing Balance” by R.A. Clark et al. [Gait & Posture 31 (2010) 307–310]: Are the Conclusions Stated by the Authors Justified? Gait Posture 2014, 39, 1150–1151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- GHB Intellect. Is Reverse Engineering Legal? Available online: https://ghbintellect.com/is-reverse-engineering-legal/ (accessed on 8 August 2022).
- Legal Information Institute—Cornell Law School. Reverse Engineering. Available online: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/reverse_engineering#:~:text=Reverse%20engineering%20is%20generally%20legal,engineering%20is%20not%20a%20defense (accessed on 8 August 2022).
- Estévez-Pedraza, Á.G.; Parra-Rodríguez, L.; Martínez-Méndez, R.; Portillo-Rodríguez, O.; Ronzón-Hernández, Z. A Novel Model to Quantify Balance Alterations in Older Adults Based on the Center of Pressure (CoP) Measurements with a Cross-Sectional Study. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0256129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prieto, T.E.; Myklebust, J.B.; Hoffmann, R.G.; Lovett, E.G.; Myklebust, B.M. Measures of Postural Steadiness: Differences between Healthy Young and Elderly Adults. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 1996, 43, 956–966. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Khasnis, A.; Gokula, R.M. Romberg’s Test. J. Postgrad. Med. 2003, 49, 169. [Google Scholar]
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Assessment Timed Up & Go (TUG). Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/steadi/pdf/STEADI-Assessment-TUG-508.pdf (accessed on 4 September 2021).
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Assessment 30-Second Chair Stand. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/steadi/pdf/STEADI-Assessment-30Sec-508.pdf (accessed on 4 September 2021).
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The 4-Stage Balance Test. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/steadi/pdf/4-Stage_Balance_Test-print.pdf (accessed on 4 September 2021).
- Yardley, L.; Beyer, N.; Hauer, K.; Kempen, G. Development and Initial Validation of the Falls Efficacy Scale-International (FES-I). Age Ageing 2005, 34, 614–619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Koo, T.K.; Li, M.Y. A Guideline of Selecting and Reporting Intraclass Correlation Coefficients for Reliability Research. J. Chiropr. Med. 2016, 15, 155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Brooke, J. SUS: A “Quick and Dirty” Usability Scale. Usability Eval. Ind. 1996, 207–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bangor, A.; Kortum, P.T.; Miller, J.T. An Empirical Evaluation of the System Usability Scale. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 2008, 24, 574–594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mukaka, M.M. A Guide to Appropriate Use of Correlation Coefficient in Medical Research. Malawi Med. J. 2012, 24, 69. [Google Scholar]
- Hulley, S.B.; Cummings, S.R.; Browner, W.S.; Grady, D.G.; Newman, T.B. Estimating Sample Size and Power: Applications and Examples. In Designing Clinical Research, 4th ed.; LWW: Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2013; pp. 55–83. [Google Scholar]
- Shieh, G. Sample Size Requirements for the Design of Reliability Studies: Precision Consideration. Behav. Res. Methods 2014, 46, 808–822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kimberlin, C.L.; Winterstein, A.G. Validity and Reliability of Measurement Instruments Used in Research. Am. J. Health Syst. Pharm. 2008, 65, 2276–2284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Higgins, P.A.; Straub, A.J. Understanding the Error of Our Ways: Mapping the Concepts of Validity and Reliability. Nurs. Outlook 2006, 54, 23–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weaver, T.B.; Ma, C.; Laing, A.C. Use of the Nintendo Wii Balance Board for Studying Standing Static Balance Control: Technical Considerations, Force-Plate Congruency, and the Effect of Battery Life. J. Appl. Biomech. 2017, 33, 48–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scaglioni-Solano, P.; Aragón-Vargas, L.F. Validity and Reliability of the Nintendo Wii Balance Board to Assess Standing Balance and Sensory Integration in Highly Functional Older Adults. Int. J. Rehabil. Res. 2014, 37, 138–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, J.; Webb, G.; Shortland, A.P.; Edwards, R.; Wilce, C.; Jones, G.D. Reliability and Feasibility of Gait Initiation Centre-of-Pressure Excursions Using a Wii® Balance Board in Older Adults at Risk of Falling. Aging Clin. Exp. Res. 2019, 31, 257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Bower, K.J.; McGinley, J.L.; Miller, K.J.; Clark, R.A. Instrumented Static and Dynamic Balance Assessment after Stroke Using Wii Balance Boards: Reliability and Association with Clinical Tests. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e115282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Quijoux, F.; Vienne-Jumeau, A.; Bertin-Hugault, F.; Zawieja, P.; Lefèvre, M.; Vidal, P.-P.; Ricard, D. Center of Pressure Displacement Characteristics Differentiate Fall Risk in Older People: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis. Ageing Res. Rev. 2020, 62, 101117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Quijoux, F.; Nicolaï, A.; Chairi, I.; Bargiotas, I.; Ricard, D.; Yelnik, A.; Oudre, L.; Bertin-Hugault, F.; Vidal, P.; Vayatis, N.; et al. A Review of Center of Pressure (COP) Variables to Quantify Standing Balance in Elderly People: Algorithms and Open-access Code. Physiol. Rep. 2021, 9, e15067. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Osoba, M.Y.; Rao, A.K.; Agrawal, S.K.; Lalwani, A.K. Balance and Gait in the Elderly: A Contemporary Review. Laryngoscope Investig. Otolaryngol. 2019, 4, 143–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cho, K.H.; Bok, S.K.; Kim, Y.J.; Hwang, S.L. Effect of Lower Limb Strength on Falls and Balance of the Elderly. Ann. Rehabil. Med. 2012, 36, 386–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Winter, D.A.A. Human Balance and Posture Control during Standing and Walking. Gait Posture 1995, 3, 193–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chiari, L.; Rocchi, L.; Cappello, A. Stabilometric Parameters Are Affected by Anthropometry and Foot Placement. Clin. Biomech. 2002, 17, 666–677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schülein, S.; Sieber, C.C.; Gaßmann, K.-G.; Ritt, M. Frail Older Individuals Maintaining a Steady Standing Position: Associations Between Sway Measurements with Frailty Status Across Four Different Frailty Instruments. Clin. Interv. Aging 2020, 15, 451–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gadelha, A.B.; Neri, S.G.R.; de Oliveira, R.J.; Bottaro, M.; de David, A.C.; Vainshelboim, B.; Lima, R.M. Severity of Sarcopenia Is Associated with Postural Balance and Risk of Falls in Community-Dwelling Older Women. Exp. Aging Res. 2018, 44, 258–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Iaboni, A.; Flint, A.J. The Complex Interplay of Depression and Falls in Older Adults: A Clinical Review. Am. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry 2013, 21, 484–492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Mc Ardle, R.; Pratt, S.; Buckley, C.; del Din, S.; Galna, B.; Thomas, A.; Rochester, L.; Alcock, L. Balance Impairments as Differential Markers of Dementia Disease Subtype. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 2021, 9, 639337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- ISO 9241-11:2018 (En); Ergonomics of Human-System Interaction—Part 11: Usability: Definitions and Concepts. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2018. Available online: https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:9241:-11:en (accessed on 27 June 2022).
- Broekhuis, M.; van Velsen, L.; Hermens, H. Assessing Usability of EHealth Technology: A Comparison of Usability Benchmarking Instruments. Int. J. Med. Inform. 2019, 128, 24–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Oliveira, M.R.; Vieira, E.R.; Gil, A.W.O.; Fernandes, K.B.P.; Teixeira, D.C.; Amorim, C.F.; da Silva, R.A. One-Legged Stance Sway of Older Adults with and without Falls. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0203887. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fino, P.C.; Mojdehi, A.R.; Adjerid, K.; Habibi, M.; Lockhart, T.E.; Ross, S.D. Comparing Postural Stability Entropy Analyses to Differentiate Fallers and Non-Fallers. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 2016, 44, 1636–1645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Howcroft, J.; Lemaire, E.D.; Kofman, J.; McIlroy, W.E. Elderly Fall Risk Prediction Using Static Posturography. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0172398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Audiffren, J.; Bargiotas, I.; Vayatis, N.; Vidal, P.-P.; Ricard, D. A Non Linear Scoring Approach for Evaluating Balance: Classification of Elderly as Fallers and Non-Fallers. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0167456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kwok, B.-C.; Clark, R.A.; Pua, Y.-H. Novel Use of the Wii Balance Board to Prospectively Predict Falls in Community-Dwelling Older Adults. Clin. Biomech. 2015, 30, 481–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hsieh, K.L.; Roach, K.L.; Wajda, D.A.; Sosnoff, J.J. Smartphone Technology Can Measure Postural Stability and Discriminate Fall Risk in Older Adults. Gait Posture 2019, 67, 160–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clark, R.A.; Bell, S.W.; Feller, J.A.; Whitehead, T.S.; Webster, K.E. Standing Balance and Inter-Limb Balance Asymmetry at One Year Post Primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Sex Differences in a Cohort Study of 414 Patients. Gait Posture 2017, 52, 318–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clark, R.A.; Seah, F.J.-T.; Chong, H.-C.; Poon, C.L.-L.; Tan, J.W.-M.; Mentiplay, B.F.; Pua, Y.-H. Standing Balance Post Total Knee Arthroplasty: Sensitivity to Change Analysis from Four to Twelve Weeks in 466 Patients. Osteoarthr. Cartil. 2017, 25, 42–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Bartlett, H.L.; Ting, L.H.; Bingham, J.T. Accuracy of Force and Center of Pressure Measures of the Wii Balance Board. Gait Posture 2014, 39, 224–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Characteristic | Intra-Rater n = 16 | Inter-Rater n = 43 | p-Value |
---|---|---|---|
Age (years) | 75.66 (7.62) | 72.61 (7.86) | 0.264 |
Sex (women) | 9 (56.3%) | 19 (44.2%) | 0.409 |
Height (cm) | 154.68 (9.89) | 158.83 (11.17) | 0.191 |
Weight (kg) | 59.79 (9.54) | 65.09 (10.82) | 0.100 |
Gait deficit | 13 (81.3%) | 27 (62.8%) | 0.177 |
Leg-strength deficit | 16 (100%) | 43 (100%) | - |
Balance deficit | 13 (81.3%) | 30 (69.8%) | 0.378 |
Use of gait assistive devices | 4 (25%) | 9 (20.9%) | 0.737 |
Presence of lower limb prostheses | 4 (25%) | 6 (14%) | 0.315 |
Complete or partial visual impairment | 3 (18.3%) | 4 (9.3%) | 0.318 |
Partial hearing impairment | 3 (18.3%) | 3 (7%) | 0.183 |
Diabetes | 6 (37.5%) | 10 (23.3%) | 0.274 |
Hypertension | 4 (25%) | 12 (27.9%) | 0.823 |
Fear of falling (FES-I score ≥ 23) | 9 (56.3%) | 27 (62.8%) | 0.647 |
Fell last year | 9 (56.3%) | 21 (48.8%) | 0.613 |
CoP Indices | Test Mean (SD) | Retest Mean (SD) | ICC (IC 95%) | Correlation Coefficient |
---|---|---|---|---|
POWER95MLCE | 1.5 (0.82) | 1.59 (0.99) | 0.948 (0.862–0.982) | 0.966 |
MVELMLOE | 9.65 (7.25) | 10.49 (8.04) | 0.920 (0.792–0.971) | 0.926 |
RDISTMLOE | 4.41 (2.4) | 4.98 (2.49) | 0.883 (0.640–0.951) | 0.880 |
RDISTOE | 6.72 (3.37) | 7.22 (3.08) | 0.882 (0.572–0.993) | 0.826 |
POWER95RDOE | 2.08 (0.65) | 2.09 (0.81) | 0.869 (0.665–0.952) | 0.884 |
sRDOE | 3.39 (1.81) | 3.48 (1.51) | 0.868 (0.664–0.952) | 0.879 |
TPOWERMLOE | 12.43 (16.54) | 12.39 (17.96) | 0.859 (0.640–0.949) | 0.854 |
RDISTAPCE | 6.08 (2.58) | 5.9 (2.3) | 0.852 (0.629–0.945) | 0.851 |
MDISTAPCE | 4.85 (2.03) | 4.69 (1.83) | 0.851 (0.629–0.945) | 0.851 |
RANGEMLOE | 25.36 (15.46) | 28.23 (17.17) | 0.834 (0.597–0.938) | 0.843 |
CFREQMLOE | 0.72 (0.24) | 0.7 (0.21) | 0.834 (0.594–0.939) | 0.836 |
MDISTMLOE | 3.45 (1.83) | 3.96 (1.98) | 0.832 (0.563–0.939) | 0.857 |
CFREQMLCE | 0.74 (0.25) | 0.79 (0.36) | 0.819 (0.565–0.932) | 0.873 |
POWER95MLOE | 1.44 (0.82) | 1.37 (0.68) | 0.817 (0.638–0.996) | 0.604 |
AREACCOE | 507.37 (497.54) | 534.65 (497.19) | 0.817 (0.637–0.996) | 0.774 |
AREACEOE | 480.76 (467.52) | 492.03 (501.33) | 0.815 (0.545–0.932) | 0.807 |
MVELAPCE | 21.84 (14.39) | 22.66 (11.35) | 0.809 (0.622–0.996) | 0.776 |
CoP Indices | Rater 1 Mean (SD) | Rater 2 Mean (SD) | Rater 3 Mean (SD) | ICC(2,1) (CI 95%) |
---|---|---|---|---|
CFREQAPCE | 0.84 (0.3) | 0.87 (0.28) | 0.84 (0.26) | 0.825 (0.717–0.934) |
MFREQAPCE | 0.69 (0.36) | 0.68 (0.28) | 0.69 (0.33) | 0.819 (0.711–0.927) |
POWER95APCE | 1.71 (0.76) | 1.74 (0.65) | 1.71 (0.69) | 0.809 (0.701–0.918) |
MVELAPOE | 12.37 (7.77) | 11.44 (7.07) | 10.93 (5.84) | 0.789 (0.665–0.914) |
MVELOE | 17.02 (8.98) | 15.88 (8.48) | 15.74 (8.08) | 0.789 (0.676–0.901) |
POWER95RDCE | 1.98 (0.69) | 2.04 (0.6) | 2.06 (0.69) | 0.774 (0.660–0.861) |
AREASWOE | 32.94 (27.16) | 30.43 (30.14) | 31.51 (33.39) | 0.768 (0.604–0.932) |
FDCCCE | 1.93 (0.2) | 1.92 (0.15) | 1.93 (0.18) | 0.766 (0.648–0.856) |
POWER50APCE | 0.44 (0.15) | 0.46 (0.14) | 0.45 (0.15) | 0.762 (0.622–0.902) |
MVELAPCE | 17.64 (10.32) | 16.3 (8.69) | 17.32 (10.98) | 0.752 (0.594–0.911) |
FDPDCE | 1.78 (0.15) | 1.76 (0.13) | 1.76 (0.13) | 0.751 (0.628–0.846) |
ID | Age [Years] | Experience in Geriatric Care and Management [Years] | Professional Profile | SUS Score |
---|---|---|---|---|
Rater 1 | 21 | 3.5 | Gerontology student | 100 |
Rater 2 | 21 | 2.5 | Gerontology student | 90 |
Rater 3 | 20 | 1.5 | Gerontology student | 82.5 |
Rater 4 | 35 | 10 | Physiotherapist | 92.5 |
Rater 5 | 32 | 8 | Physiotherapist | 97.5 |
CoP Indices | Without Balance Deficit n = 16 Mean (SD) | With Balance Deficit n = 43 Mean (SD) | Optimal Cut-Off Point | AUC | Sensitivity | Specificity |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MFREQAPOE | 0.59 (0.52) | 0.70 (0.30) | 0.4383 | 0.778 | 0.93 | 0.625 |
AREASWOE | 18.50 (15.0) | 43.91 (39.24) | 15.4771 | 0.774 | 0.861 | 0.688 |
MVELOE | 12.51 (6.92) | 20.37 (11.15) | 15.8459 | 0.752 | 1 | 0 |
MVELAPOE | 8.64 (5.96) | 15.52 (9.34) | 10.2551 | 0.747 | 0.744 | 0.75 |
RANGEAPOE | 18.89 (7.53) | 28.87 (12.52) | 20.3611 | 0.747 | 0.744 | 0.75 |
RANGEOE | 22.54 (10.35) | 34.25 (17.18) | 22.0363 | 0.743 | 0.861 | 0.625 |
RANGEXOE | 18.36 (9.44) | 27.99 (16.29) | 18.2051 | 0.739 | 0.791 | 0.688 |
TPOWERAPOE | 6.16 (6.84) | 14.93 (19.72) | 6.9855 | 0.732 | 1 | 0 |
sRDOE | 2.37 (1.05) | 3.43 (1.55) | 2.1303 | 0.723 | 0.884 | 0.563 |
AREACCOE | 256.28 (233.49) | 486.57 (393.27) | 150.5037 | 0.692 | 0.884 | 0.5 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Estévez-Pedraza, Á.G.; Hernandez-Laredo, E.; Millan-Guadarrama, M.E.; Martínez-Méndez, R.; Carrillo-Vega, M.F.; Parra-Rodríguez, L. Reliability and Usability Analysis of an Embedded System Capable of Evaluating Balance in Elderly Populations Based on a Modified Wii Balance Board. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 11026. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191711026
Estévez-Pedraza ÁG, Hernandez-Laredo E, Millan-Guadarrama ME, Martínez-Méndez R, Carrillo-Vega MF, Parra-Rodríguez L. Reliability and Usability Analysis of an Embedded System Capable of Evaluating Balance in Elderly Populations Based on a Modified Wii Balance Board. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(17):11026. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191711026
Chicago/Turabian StyleEstévez-Pedraza, Ángel Gabriel, Enrique Hernandez-Laredo, María Elena Millan-Guadarrama, Rigoberto Martínez-Méndez, María Fernanda Carrillo-Vega, and Lorena Parra-Rodríguez. 2022. "Reliability and Usability Analysis of an Embedded System Capable of Evaluating Balance in Elderly Populations Based on a Modified Wii Balance Board" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19, no. 17: 11026. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191711026