Arai 2007.
| Methods | Type of study: RCT single‐blinded | |
| Participants | Number of participants randomised: 171 Losses: 34 (14 intervention, 20 control; (12 men, 22 women) Age: mean (SD) 74.1 for both groups. Exercise 73.9 (5.0) control 74.4 (6.2) Sex: women and men (N = not reported). Residential status of participants: community dwelling Health status as defined by authors: healthy Setting: Japan. Inclusion: Age 65 and older; community dwelling; ambulatory Exclusion: cerebrovascular and cardiovascular accident in last 6 months; liver disease; diabetes; high BP; heart disease; depression; restriction of activity on the advice of the GP |
|
| Interventions | EXERCISE GROUP (MULTIPLE) (n = 86): strengthening exercises (high intensity >70% 1 RM (repetition maximum)), highly challenging balance exercises, flexibility; daily functions CONTROL GROUP (n = 85): health education Duration and intensity: 3 months of 2 x 1.5 hour supervised classes per week. Supervisor: fitness staff. Supervision: group exercise classes 1:10 staff:participant Setting: university gym | |
| Outcomes | Timed Up and Go (s) One Legged Stand Time (OLST) eyes open and closed (s) Functional Reach (cm) Compliance/adherence:There was a difference in completers versus drop outs in knee extension strength Adverse events: No adverse events reported. |
|
| Notes | The Education Group met 2 x per month and had lectures on the benefits of exercise, but no diaries of activity or reporting on change in activity as a result of education | |
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Insufficient information to permit judgement |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Insufficient information to permit judgement |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Intention‐to‐treat analysis; knee extension strength different in completers versus drop outs |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Unclear risk | Insufficient information to permit judgement |
| Other bias | Low risk | The study appears to be free of other sources of bias |
| Blinding (participant) | High risk | Not possible |
| Blinding (assessor) | Low risk | Reported |
| Were the treatment and control group comparable at entry? | Unclear risk | Insufficient information to permit judgement |
| Was the surveillance active, and of clinically appropriate duration (i.e. at least 3 months post intervention)? | High risk | Only immediately post intervention data, no follow‐up data reported |