The Balance Outcome Measure for Elder Rehabilitation (BOOMER)
Original Editor - Ben Kasehagen
Top Contributors - Lauren Lopez, Ben Kasehagen, Lucinda hampton, Evan Thomas, Kim Jackson, Scott Buxton, WikiSysop, Claire Knott, Amrita Patro, 127.0.0.1 and Admin
Objective[edit | edit source]
The Balance Outcome Measure for Elder Rehabilitation (BOOMER) was developed to assist in clinical practice to quantify standing balance.[1] The combination of a variety of single-item outcome measures makes the BOOMER a highly feasible and applicable tool that is both time and resource efficient.[1]
Intended Population[edit | edit source]
Older adults with deficiencies in standing balance.[2]
Method of Use[edit | edit source]
Instructions[edit | edit source]
The BOOMER consists of the following four tests:
| Test | Description |
|---|---|
| Step Test | One foot is repeatedly placed on top of a 7.5cm step and returned back down to the ground
as many times as able in 15 sec. The average between legs is then calculated for scoring. |
| Timed Up and Go | From a seated position, individual stands, walks 3m, turns 180°, walks 3m back to chair and sits
down with back resting against the backrest. |
| Functional Reach | Individual reaches as far forward as possible in a standing position without losing balance. |
| Timed Static Stance | Feet together with eyes closed. |
The four components of the BOOMER are performed in one session. Areas of interest are identified with treatment continued as appropriate.
Scoring[edit | edit source]
An individual's performance on each measure will be converted to a 5-point ordinal scale. The scale ranges from 0 (unable to perform the test (or 0 on FR)) to 4 (excellent) with a maximum score of 16.[2]
Table: BOOMER scoring[2]
| Tests | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
| Step test (ave) | Unable | 0 - 5 | 5 - 8 | 8 - 12 | >12 |
| TUG (sec) | Unable | ≥ 30 |
29 - 20 | 19 - 10 | <10 |
| FR (cm) | 0 | 1 - 15 | 16 - 20 | 21 - 30 | > 30 |
| Standing (eyes closed) (sec) | Unable | 0 - 30 | 30 - 60 | 60 - <90 | 90 |
Evidence[edit | edit source]
Comparison to similar tests; Function instrument motor score (FIM) and Modified elderly mobility scale (MEMS)[1]
- Good correlation with motor FIM (admission p=.73 and discharge p=.72)
- Good correlation with MEMS (admission p=.88 and discharge p=.83)
p = Spearman p correlation coefficient
Links[edit | edit source]
References[edit | edit source]
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 Haines T, Kuys SS, Morrison G, Clarke J, Bew P, McPhail S. Development and validation of the balance outcome measure for elder rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007; 88(12): 1614-1621.
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 Kuys SS, Morrison G, Bew, PG, Clarke J, Haines TP. Further validation of the balance outcome measure for elder rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2011; 92(1):101-105.
