| Methods |
RCT with 3 groups: PRT, control, and aerobic group
Method of randomisation: not reported
Assessor blinding: yes
Participant blinding: not reported
Loss to follow‐up: 1/11‐control group, 1/13‐aerobic training group, 6/17‐resistance training group
Intention‐to‐treat analysis: no
Post‐program follow up: no |
| Participants |
Location: USA
N = 28 (17 in PRT)
Sample: post hip fracture
Age: mean 77.9 years (SD = 7.9)
Inclusion criteria: successful fixation of a hip fracture, at least 65 years old, living at home, and willing to come to the study site
Exclusion criteria: history of unstable angina, uncompensated congestive heart failure, metabolic conditions (i.e., renal dialysis), stroke, Parkinson's disease, life expectancy of less than 6 months, MMSE score is less than 20, and living in a nursing home |
| Interventions |
PRT versus control and versus aerobic
1.PRT
Type of Ex: 4LL
Equipment: portable progressive‐resistance ex. machine and body weight
Intensity: 8 RM
Frequency: first 2 months‐Ex2, the 3rd month‐Ex1
Reps/Sets: 8/3
Duration: 12 weeks
Setting: participant's home
Supervision: full‐6 physical therapists
Adherence: 98%
2. Control group: received biweekly mailing of non‐ex health topics
3. Aerobic group: N=13, mean age =79.8 years , walking or stepping, LEs/UEs active ROM ex, 65‐75% max heart rate |
| Outcomes |
Primary: SF‐36
Secondary: strength measure, 6‐minute walking test, walking endurance, gait speed
Comments on adverse events: yes |
| Notes |
Data from PRT and aerobic training group were compared |
| Risk of bias |
| Bias |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
| Allocation concealment? |
Unclear risk |
B ‐ Unclear |
