Skip to main content
. 2009 Jul 8;2009(3):CD002759. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002759.pub2

Bean 2004.

Methods RCT 
 Method of randomisation: not reported 
 Assessor blinding: yes 
 Participant blinding: not reported 
 Loss to follow‐up: 1/10 in the control group 
 Intention‐to‐treat analysis: no 
 Post‐program follow up: no
Participants Location: USA 
 N = 21 (11 in PRT) 
 Sample: community dwelling older females (with physical performance limitations??) 
 Age: mean 77.1 years (SD = 5.7) 
 Inclusion criteria: female sex, age of 70 and older, and a score between four and 10 on the Short Physical Performance Battery 
 Exclusion criteria: unstable acute or chronic medical conditions, a score less than 23 on the MMSE, or a neuromusculoskeletal condition interfering with exercise participation
Interventions PRT versus control 
 1. PRT 
 Type of Ex: 2UL/4LL with fast concentric phase 
 Equipment: weighted vest 
 Intensity: increased to the next level (increase 2% of the subject's baseline body mass) after 10 reps/3 sets 
 Frequency: Ex3 
 Reps/Sets: 8/3 
 Duration: 12 weeks 
 Setting: research center (Gym?) 
 Supervision: full 
 Adherence: 88 to 90 % 
 2. Control group: slow velocity and low resistance exercise with body or limb weight, 3 times a week
Outcomes Primary: Short Physical Performance Battery (including chair rise) 
 Secondary: Muscle strength 
 Comments on adverse events: yes
Notes Post mean = baseline + change score; baseline SD was used
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Allocation concealment? Unclear risk B ‐ Unclear