ORIGINAL PAPER
Discriminant validity and test–retest reliability of a digital game-based rehabilitation platform to assess balance and cognition in elderly Indians with diabetes: a cross-sectional study
1
Shri Dharmasthala Manjunatheswara University Dharwad, Karnataka, India
2
Department of Physical Therapy College of Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada
Submission date: 2025-04-26
Acceptance date: 2025-12-15
Online publication date: 2026-09-18
Corresponding author
Salima M. Bijapuri
Shri Dharmasthala Manjunatheswara University Dharwad, Medical College Campus, Manjushree Nagar, Sattur Colony, Dharwad, Karnataka 580009, India
Shri Dharmasthala Manjunatheswara University Dharwad, Medical College Campus, Manjushree Nagar, Sattur Colony, Dharwad, Karnataka 580009, India
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Objective:
Ageing impairs balance and cognitive function, exacerbated by type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), thereby increasing fall risk. Dual-task assessments combining motor and cognitive demands via feasible clinical tools are needed. This cross-sectional study assessed the test–retest reliability and discriminant validity of a computer game-based rehabilitation protocol (CGRP) incorporating balance and cognitive tasks in older adults with T2DM.
Methods:
Thirty older adults with T2DM (mean age: 68.83 ± 2.90 years) underwent CGRP evaluations of centre of pressure (COP) excursions under 10 conditions, repeated after one week. For discriminant validity, an additional 30 participants (15 with T2DM and 15 age-matched non-diabetics) were recruited. Reliability was analysed via intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), standard error of measurement, and minimal detectable change. Discriminant validity was examined through correlations with traditional balance scales consisting of the Berg balance scale (BBS), dynamic gait index (DGI), activities-specific balance confidence (ABC) and group comparisons using baseline scores.
Results:
The CGRP showed excellent test–retest reliability (ICC = 0.82–0.98; 95% confidence intervals: 0.69–0.99), with no significant systematic errors (p > 0.05). COP excursions increased under DT (dual task) conditions, particularly on sponge surfaces. Weak correlations (Spearman’s rho: −0.372 to 0.455; p > 0.05) with BBS, DGI, and ABC supported discriminant validity (weaker in T2DM). Significant group differences were observed in ABC scores (p = 0.011) and sponge surface eyes-closed COP excursions (p = 0.037).
Conclusions:
The CGRP is a reliable and valid tool for assessing DT balance and cognition in older adults with T2DM.
Ageing impairs balance and cognitive function, exacerbated by type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), thereby increasing fall risk. Dual-task assessments combining motor and cognitive demands via feasible clinical tools are needed. This cross-sectional study assessed the test–retest reliability and discriminant validity of a computer game-based rehabilitation protocol (CGRP) incorporating balance and cognitive tasks in older adults with T2DM.
Methods:
Thirty older adults with T2DM (mean age: 68.83 ± 2.90 years) underwent CGRP evaluations of centre of pressure (COP) excursions under 10 conditions, repeated after one week. For discriminant validity, an additional 30 participants (15 with T2DM and 15 age-matched non-diabetics) were recruited. Reliability was analysed via intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), standard error of measurement, and minimal detectable change. Discriminant validity was examined through correlations with traditional balance scales consisting of the Berg balance scale (BBS), dynamic gait index (DGI), activities-specific balance confidence (ABC) and group comparisons using baseline scores.
Results:
The CGRP showed excellent test–retest reliability (ICC = 0.82–0.98; 95% confidence intervals: 0.69–0.99), with no significant systematic errors (p > 0.05). COP excursions increased under DT (dual task) conditions, particularly on sponge surfaces. Weak correlations (Spearman’s rho: −0.372 to 0.455; p > 0.05) with BBS, DGI, and ABC supported discriminant validity (weaker in T2DM). Significant group differences were observed in ABC scores (p = 0.011) and sponge surface eyes-closed COP excursions (p = 0.037).
Conclusions:
The CGRP is a reliable and valid tool for assessing DT balance and cognition in older adults with T2DM.
REFERENCES (45)
1.
Anjana RM, Unnikrishnan R, Deepa M, Pradeepa R, Tandon N, Das AK, Joshi S, Bajaj S, Jabbar PK, Das AK, Joshi S, Bajaj S, Jabbar PK, Das HK, Kumar A, Dhandhania VK, Bhansali A, Rao PV, Desai A, Kalra S, Gupta A, Lakshmy R, Madhu SV, Elangovan N, Chowdhury S, Venkatesan U, Subashini R, Kaur T, Dhaliwal RS, Mohan V; ICMR-INDIAB Collaborative Study Group. Metabolic non-communicable disease health report of India: the ICMR-INDIAB national cross-sectional study (ICMR-INDIAB-17). Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2023; 11(7):474–89; doi: 10.1016/S2213-8587(23)00119-5.
2.
World Health Organization. Noncommunicable diseases fact sheet. Geneva: WHO; 2025. Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/... (accessed 26.04.2025).
3.
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. World Population Prospects 2024: Summary of Results. New York: UN; 2024. Available from: https://reliefweb.int/report/w... (accessed 26.04.2025).
4.
Pradhan J, Pai M, Dwivedi R,Mishra B, Behera S, Bera T, Kim R, Subramanian SV.Burden of non-communicable diseases in South Asia: a decomposition analysis.J Health Popul Nutr. 2025;44:124; doi: 10.1186/s41043-025-00827-0.
5.
Hewston P, Deshpande N. Falls and balance impairments in older adults with type 2 diabetes: thinking beyond diabetic peripheral neuropathy. Can J Diabetes. 2016;40(1):6–9; doi: 10.1016/j.jcjd.2015.08.005.
6.
Youssef MK. Effect of exercise in obese diabetic patients with chronic kidney disease. Physiother Quart. 2023;31(1):6–12; doi: 10.5114/pq.2023.116196.
7.
Sewillam AE, Sry ZM, Salem NA, Hussein AA, Essmat A, Abdeen HA. Effect of structured physical therapy program on patients with diabetes and mild cognitive impairment: randomised controlled trial. Physiother Quart. 2024;32(2):100–6; doi: 10.5114/pq/166622.
8.
Alberti KG, Zimmet PZ. Definition, diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus and its complications. Part 1: diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus provisional report of a WHO consultation. Diabet Med. 1998;15(7):539–53; doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1096-9136(199807)15:7<539::AID-DIA668>3.0.CO;2-S.
9.
Horak FB. Postural orientation and equilibrium: what do we need to know about neural control of balance to prevent falls?. Age Ageing.2006;35(suppl2):ii7–11; doi: 10.1093/ageing/afl077.
10.
Bhatt M. Evaluation of a computer game-based rehabilitation system for assessment of balance and gait impairments in individuals with Parkinson’s disease. Published online first: 2018. Available from: https://mspace.lib.umanitoba.c... (accessed 26.04.2025).
11.
Desai A, Goodman V, Kapadia N, Shay BL, Szturm T. Relationship between dynamic balance measures and functional performance in community-dwelling elderly people. Phys Ther. 2010;90(5):748–60; doi: 10.2522/ptj.20090100.
12.
Ghoochani BZ, Hosseini SA, Talebian S, Biglarian A, Zeinalzadeh A, Nazary-Moghadam S, Derakhshanrad SA. Healthy older adults balance pattern under dual task conditions: exploring the strategy and trend. Health Promot Perspect. 2016;6(4):207; doi: 10.15171/hpp.2016.34.
13.
Cheng K, Alkhameys F, Devos H, Kluding P, Miles J, Huang C-K. Virtual reality for balance in individuals with diabetes: a systematic review of assessment and intervention strategies. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2025:19322968251375370; doi: 10.1177/19322968251375370.
14.
Begde A, Alqurafi A, Pain MTG, Blenkinsop G, Wilcockson TDW, Hogervorst E. The effectiveness of home-based exergames training on cognition and balance in older adults: a comparative quasi-randomized study of two exergame interventions. Innov Aging. 2023;7(8):igad102; doi: 10.1093/geroni/igad102. eCollection 2023.
15.
Reinders EFH, de Vries R, Wouters-van Poppel PCM, Van Riel NAW, Haak HR. Serious digital games for diabetes mellitus: a scoping review of its current state, accessibility, and functionality for patients and healthcare providers. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2024;216:111833.
16.
Zou GY. Sample size formulas for estimating intraclass correlation coefficients with precision and assurance. Stat Med. 2012;31(29):3972–81; doi: 10.1002/sim.5466.
17.
Bullen JA. Studies of medical tests: design and analytical considerations. Chest. 2020;158(1S):103–12; doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2020.03.006.
18.
Christopher A, Kraft E, Olenick H, Kiesling R, Doty A. The reliability and validity of the Timed Up and Go as a clinical tool in individuals with and without disabilities across a lifespan: a systematic review. Disabil Rehabil. 2021;43(13):1799–813; doi: 10.1080/09638288.2019.1682066.
19.
Donoghue D; Physiotherapy Research and Older People (PROP) group; Stokes EK. How much change is true change? The minimum detectable change of the Berg Balance Scale in elderly people. J Rehabil Med. 2009;41(5):343–6; doi: 10.2340/16501977-0337.
20.
Betker AL, Desai A, Nett C, Kapadia N, Szturm T. Game-based exercises for dynamic short-sitting balance rehabilitation of people with chronic spinal cord and traumatic brain injuries. Phys Ther. 2007;87(10):1389–98; doi: 10.2522/ptj.20060229.
21.
Szturm T, Maharjan P, Marotta JJ, Shay B, Shrestha S, Sakhalkar V. The interacting effect of cognitive and motor task demands on performance of gait, balance and cognition in young adults. Gait Posture. 2013;38(4):596–602; doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2013.02.004.
22.
Szturm T, Sakhalkar V, Boreskie S, Marotta JJ, Wu C, Kanitkar A. Integrated testing of standing balance and cognition: test-retest reliability and construct validity. Gait Posture. 2015,41:146–52; doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2014.09.023.
23.
Viveiro LAP, Gomes GCV, Bacha JMR, Carvas Junior N, Kallas ME, Reis M, Jacob Filho W, Pompeu JE. Reliability, validity, and ability to identity fall status of the Berg Balance Scale, Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest), Mini-BESTest, and Brief-BESTest in older adults who live in nursing homes. J Geriatr Phys Ther. 2019;42(4):45–54; doi: 10.1519/JPT.0000000000000215.
24.
Downs S, Marquez J, Chiarelli P. The Berg Balance Scale has high intra- and inter-rater reliability but absolute reliability varies across the scale: a systematic review. J Physiother. 2013;59(2):93–9; doi: 10.1016/S1836-9553(13)70161-9.
25.
Marques A, Silva A, Oliveira A, Cruz J, Machado A, Jácome C. Validity and relative ability of 4 balance tests to identify fall status of older adults with type 2 diabetes. J Geriatr Phys Ther. 2017;40(4):227–32; doi: 10.1519/JPT.0000000000000109.
26.
Jonsdottir J, Cattaneo D. Reliability and validity of the dynamic gait index in persons with chronic stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007;88(11):1410–5; doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2007.08.109.
27.
Cleary KK, Skornyakov E. Reliability and internal consistency of the activities-specific balance confidence scale. Physical Occup Ther Geriatrics. 2014;32(1):58–67; doi: 10.3109/02703181.2013.875091.
28.
Mokkink LB, Boers M, van der Vleuten CPM, Bouter LM, Alonso J, Patrick DL, de Vet HCW, Terwee CB. COSMIN Risk of Bias tool to assess the quality of studies on reliability or measurement error of outcome measurement instruments: a Delphi study. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020;20(1):293; doi: 10.1186/s12874-020-01179-5.
29.
De la Torre J, Marin J, Polo M, Marín JJ. Applying the minimal detectable change of a static and dynamic balance test using a portable stabilometric platform to individually assess patients with balance disorders. Healthcare. 2020;8(4):402; doi: 10.3390/healthcare8040402.
30.
Shou Y, Sellbom M, Chen H-F. Fundamentals of measurement in clinical psychology. In: Gordon J.G. Asmundson GJG (ed.) Comprehensive Clinical Psychology. Elsevier; 2022;4, pp. 3–35; doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-818697-8.00110-2.
31.
Woods DL, Kishiyamaa MM, Lund EW, Herron TJ, Edwards B, Poliva O, Hink RF, Reed B. Improving digit span assessment of short-term verbal memory. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2011;33(1):101–11; doi: 10.1080/13803395.2010.493149.
32.
Pang MYC, Lam FM, Wong GH, Au IH, Chow DL. Balance performance in head-shake computerized dynamic posturography: aging effects and test-retest reliability. Phys Ther. 2011;91:246–53; doi: 10.2522/ptj.20100221.
33.
Krakauer JW. Motor learning: its relevance to stroke recovery and neurorehabilitation. Curr Opin Neurol. 2006;19(1):84–90; doi: 10.1097/01.wco.0000200544.29915.cc.
34.
Lin D, Seol H, Nussbaum MA, Madigan ML. Reliability of COP-based postural sway measures and age-related differences. Gait Posture. 2008;28(2):337–42; doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2008.01.005.
35.
Herman T, Inbar-Borovsky N, Brozgol M, Giladi N, Hausdorff JM. The dynamic gait index in healthy older adults: the role of stair climbing, fear of falling and gender. Gait Posture. 2009;29(2):237–41; doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2008.08.013.
36.
Barra J, Bray A, Sahni V, Golding JF, Gresty MA. Increasing cognitive load with increasing balance challenge: recipe for catastrophe. Exp Brain Res. 2006;174(4):734–45; doi: 10.1007/s00221-006-0519-2.
37.
Cholerton B, Baker LD, Montine TJ, Craft S. Type 2 diabetes, cognition, and dementia in older adults: toward a precision health approach. Diabetes Spectr. 2016;29(4):210–9; doi: 10.2337/ds16-0041.
38.
Yaffe K, Blackwell T, Whitmer RA, Krueger K, Barrett Connor E. Glycosylated hemoglobin level and development of mild cognitive impairment or dementia in older women. J Nutr Health Aging. 2006;10:293–5.
39.
Huffman JL, Horslen BC, Carpenter MG, Adkin AL. Does increased postural threat lead to more conscious control of posture?. Gait Posture. 2009;30:528–32; doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2009.08.001.
40.
Janc M, Sliwinska-Kowalska M, Politanski P, Kaminski M, Jozefowicz-Korczynska M, Zamyslowska-Szmytke E. Posturography with head movements in the assessment of balance in chronic unilateral vestibular lesions. Sci Rep. 2021;11:6196; doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-85745-x.
41.
Rine RM, Roberts D, Corbin BA, McKean-Cowdin R, Varma R, Beaumont J, Slotkin J, Schubert MC. New portable tool to screen vestibular and visual function – National Institutes of Health Toolbox initiative. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2012;49(2):209–20; doi: 10.1682/jrrd.2010.12.0239.
42.
Li Y, Hou L, Zhao H, Xie R, Yi Y, Ding X. Risk factors for falls among community-dwelling older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Med. 2023;9:1019094; doi: 10.3389/fmed.2022.1019094.
43.
Chan WLS, Pin TW. Reliability, validity and minimal detectable change of 2-minute walk test, 6-minute walk test and 10-meter walk test in frail older adults with dementia. Exp Gerontol. 2019;115:9-18; doi: 10.1016/j.exger.2018.11.001.
44.
Strang AJ, Haworth J, Hieronymus M, Walsh M, Smart Jr LJ. Structural changes in postural sway lend insight into effects of balance training, vision, and support surface on postural control in a healthy population. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2011;111:1485–95; doi: 10.1007/s00421-010-1770-6.
45.
Redondo MT, Beltrán-Brotóns JL, Reales JM, Ballesteros S. Executive functions in patients with Alzheimer’s disease, type 2 diabetes mellitus patients and cognitively healthy older adults. Exp Gerontol. 2016;83:47–55; doi: 10.1016/j.exger.2016.07.013.
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
| eISSN: | 2544-4395 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
