Voukelatos 2007.
| Methods | Type of study: RCT | |
| Participants | Number of participants randomised: 702 (EX: 353 CO:349 ) Losses: 18 Age: 69 (SD 6.5) Sex: 84% women Health status defined by authors: healthy Residential status of participants: community dwelling Setting: Sydney, Australia Inclusion: aged 60 or over; living in community; not practiced tai‐chi in last 12 months; Exclusion: degenerative neurological condition; severe arthritis; marked vision impairment; unable to walk across room unaided |
|
| Interventions | EXERCISE GROUP (3D) (n = 353): Tai‐chi in community based classes around city consisting of different forms of tai‐chi CONTROL GROUP (n = 349): no intervention Duration and intensity: 1 hour tai‐chi class for 16 weeks 1x weekly Supervisor: tai‐chi instructor (22 in total) Supervision: group Setting: community venues 24 in total |
|
| Outcomes | Sway on floor (mm): Sway on foam rubber mat (mm) Lateral stability (mm) Leaning balance (mm) using maximal balance range Leaning balance (mm) coordinated stability tests Choice stepping reaction time (ms) Compliance/adherence: 76 tai‐chi did not complete post intervention balance assessments and 81 controls did not 71% of classes attended in total of classes offered. Adverse events: not reported |
|
| Notes | ||
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Randomisation list, details unknown to assessors, randomly permuted blocks of four or six, randomisation after baseline assessment. |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Low risk | Randomisation results unknown to assessors |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Intention‐to‐treat analysis |
| 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 | 4 research assistants blinded to allocation |
| 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. |