Bunout 2005.
| Methods | Study design: RCT Number of study arms: 2 Length of follow‐up: 12 months | |
| Participants | Setting: Santiago, Chile Number of participants: 298 Number analysed: 241 Number lost to follow‐up: 57 Sample: men and women Age (years): mean 75 (SD 5) Sex: 70% female Inclusion criteria: "elderly subjects" consenting to participate; able to reach community centre Exclusion criteria: severe disabling condition; cognitive impairment (MMSE < 20) |
|
| Interventions | 1. Group‐based balance, strength and walking: moderate intensity strength training using functional weight‐bearing exercises, progressive resistance TheraBands; 1 hour, 2 a week, 1 year 2. Control: no intervention | |
| Outcomes | 1. Rate of falls 2. Number of people who experienced 1 or more falls (risk of falling) 3. Number of people who died |
|
| Duration of the study | 52 weeks | |
| Adherence | Adherence measured by attendance at > 50% sessions 1. Group‐based balance, strength and walking group: 42% non‐compliant (attended < 50% sessions) |
|
| Notes | Source of funding: University of Chile
Economic information: not reported Journal website for supplementary data www.ageing.oupjournals.org. Additional data obtained from author |
|
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Randomised using computer‐generated random‐number table |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Insufficient information to permit judgement |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Participants and personnel not blinded to allocated group but impact of non‐blinding unclear |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) Falls | Unclear risk | Falls reported at follow‐up clinics by participants who were aware of their group allocation. Blinding of researchers at follow‐up not reported |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) Fractures | Unclear risk | Not applicable |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) Hospital admission, medical attention and adverse events | Unclear risk | Not applicable |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) Health related quality of life (self report) | Unclear risk | Not applicable |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) Falls and fallers | Unclear risk | Less than 20% of outcome data are missing (19%). Number lost from each group is unclear |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | High risk | Falls data were collected but number of fallers was not reported; adverse events were not reported |
| Method of ascertaining falls (recall bias) | Unclear risk | Interval recall. Falls ascertained at monthly outpatient clinic or by telephone |