Sykes 2004.
| Methods | Type of study: RCT | |
| Participants | Number of participants randomised: 40 Losses:13 (5 in exercise and 8 control) N = 40 Age: 80 +/‐ 4.5 years (Exercise group 79.5 +/‐ 3.6 : Control 80.8 +/‐ 7.3) Sex: 7 males, 20 females Health status as defined by authors: healthy Residential status of participants: community dwellers Setting: Hong Kong Inclusion:aged 75 years and older; ambulatory independent with or without aids for short distance of 20 metres; fell one or more times in previous 12 months Exclusion: terminal illness or severe dementia; nonambulatory status; amputations or severe arthritis problems; major impairment of sensorimotor function due to neurological disease; unstable cardiovascular or pulmonary conditions or diseases; episodes of unconsciousness reported in the past year; mini mental status examination (MMSE) score less than 23. |
|
| Interventions | EXERCISE GROUP (MULTIPLE): n = 20 Exercise session described as: 5 min warm up followed by leg strengthening exercises (using cuff weights and therabands and repetitions), Balance and Gait exercises (with progression) and 5 min cool down. CONTROL GROUP: n = 20 not reported assumed usual activity Duration and intensity: Introductory hour long class in centre with talk and demonstration of exercises. Then over the next 8 weeks : 45 minute daily exercise sessions at home 6 days a week and 30 minute walk twice a week. Daily activity diaries. Supervisor: physiotherapist Supervision: initial group session then phone calls weeks 1, 2, 4 and 6 Setting: initial class in centre then at home | |
| Outcomes | Berg Balance Scale (0 to 56 points) Time to get‐up and go (TUG) (s) Functional Reach (cm) Compliance/adherence: not reported 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 | Insufficient information to permit judgement |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Insufficient reporting of attrition/exclusions to permit judgement |
| 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) | Unclear risk | Insufficient information to permit judgement |
| Were the treatment and control group comparable at entry? | Low risk | No differences reported on baseline characteristics with a potential to influence the effect of the intervention |
| 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. |