| Methods |
RCT, factorial design (comparison of nutritional supplements versus placebo not considered here)
Method of randomisation: not reported
Assessor blinding: for some assessments, not for all
Participant blinding: no, but recreational activities offered to control group (? quantity)
Loss to follow‐up: 6 total (4 in PRT and control groups)
Intention‐to‐treat analysis: yes
Post‐program follow up: falls monitored median 1.53 years, max 4.11 years |
| Participants |
Location: USA
N = 51 in PRT vs control
Sample: residents of a long term care facility for older people
Age: mean 87.1 years (SE 0.6)
Inclusion criteria: residential status, age over 70 years, ability to walk 6m
Exclusion criteria: severe cognitive impairment; rapidly progressive or terminal illness, acute illness or unstable chronic illness; myocardial infarction; fracture of a lower extremity within the six months before the study; insulin dependent diabetes mellitus; on a weight‐loss diet or undergoing resistance training at the time of enrolment; tests of muscle strength revealed a musculoskeletal or cardiovascular abnormality |
| Interventions |
PRT versus control
1. PRT
Type of Ex: 2LL
Equipment: weight training machines
Intensity: high (80% of 1RM)
Frequency: Ex3
Reps/sets: 8/3
Program duration: 10 weeks
Setting: nursing home
Supervision: full
Adherence: 97%
2. Control Group: engaged in 3 activities of their choice offered by recreational therapy |
| Outcomes |
Strength (1RM)
Gait speed
Stair climbing power
Anthropometric measurements
Physical activity (leg monitors)
Comments on adverse events: yes |
| Notes |
|
| Risk of bias |
| Bias |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
| Allocation concealment? |
Unclear risk |
B ‐ Unclear |
