Abstract
Purpose: Stroke survivors living in rural and remote communities experience challenges in accessing specialized rehabilitation services. Access to balance assessment after stroke is an essential aspect of the physiotherapy assessment. Telerehabilitation (TRH) can eliminate access disparities; however, adoption into practice has been limited. Our primary objective was to examine agreement between Berg Balance Scale (BBS) scores obtained through TRH and those obtained through traditional in-person assessment of community-dwelling individuals with stroke. Method: Two raters administered the BBS to 20 community-dwelling individuals with stroke, using both TRH and traditional in-person approaches. The order of assessments and rater assignment was randomized. Interrater reliability between the methods was assessed using Krippendorff's α reliability estimate. A survey was then administered to examine the participants' perceptions of the two means of assessment. Results: Excellent interrater agreement was found between TRH and in-person assessment (κ = 0.97; 95% CI: 0.96, 0.99), and responses regarding patients' perceived hearing and understanding of instructions as well as perceived safety were comparable. In addition, the vast majority of participants agreed or strongly agreed that they would use TRH for future physiotherapy sessions. Conclusions: The results of this study support administration of the BBS using TRH technology; this could improve access to balance assessment for stroke survivors in rural and remote communities.