Bogaerts 2007.
| Methods | Type of study: RCT | |
| Participants | Number of participants randomised: 220 Losses: 33 (but an additional 23 subjects who did not reach minimal compliance were not included) WBV : n = 94; (aged 66.08 (0.5) years old); FIT: n = 60 (aged 66.8 (0.6) years old) CON: n = 66 (aged 67.8 (0.6) years old) Age: 60 to 80 Sex: WBV: 46 women and 48 men FIT: 30 women and 30 men CON: 30 women and 36 men Health status defined by authors: healthy older people Residential status of participants: community Setting: Belgium Inclusion: aged 60 to 80 years and non‐institutionalised Exclusion: diseases or medications known to affect bone metabolism or muscle strength and engagement with moderate intensity exercise programmes for more than 2 hours per week. Suffering from diabetes, neuromuscular disorder or neurodegenerative disease, stroke, heart disease |
|
| Interventions | EXERCISE GROUP (VIBRATION) Whole Body Vibration (WBV) (n = 94) exercise on vibration platform, squat, deep squat, wide stance squat, toes‐stand, toes = stand deep, 1 legged squat and lunge. 40 minute sessions. EXERCISE GROUP (MULTIPLE) (n = 60) cardiovascular, resistance and flexibility exercises for approximately 1.5 hours. CV programme of walking, running cycling or stepping. Resistance programme exercises for whole body including leg press and leg extension; balance exercise included single leg and double leg on stable and unstable surfaces. CONTROL GROUP (n = 66): no changes in lifestyle including exercise for 12 months Duration and intensity: Both groups trained 3 x week for 12 months Supervisor: exercise instructors Supervision: group Setting: university training centre |
|
| Outcomes | Sensory Organisation Test (SOT) Compliance/adherence: attendance 87.9% WBV group, 86.5% FIT group Adverse events: not reported |
|
| Notes | ||
| 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 | Not described |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | High risk | No intention‐to‐treat analysis |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | Although data difficult to access |
| Other bias | Low risk | The study appears to be free of other sources of bias |
| Blinding (participant) | High risk | Not possible |
| Blinding (assessor) | Unclear risk | Not stated |
| 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 | No follow‐up after the intervention year of the study |