Table 3.
Falls Outcomes For People With Dementia
| Usual Care Group | Tai Chi Group | Ratio At Follow-Up (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Number of falls (number per month of follow-up)a | |||
| 6-month follow-upb | 78 (0.312), n=43 | 44 (0.174), n=42 | Falls rate ratio: 0.35 (0.15, 0.81) p = 0.015 |
| Number of injurious falls (number per month of follow-up)a | |||
| 6-month follow-up | 17 (0.068), n=43 | 11 (0.043), n=42 | Falls rate ratio: 0.62 (0.23, 1.66) p = 0.34 |
| Proportion of participants fallingc | |||
| 6-month follow-up | 17 (47%), n=36 | 17 (47%), n=36 | Odds ratio: 0.97 (0.28, 3.33) p = 0.96 |
| Proportion of participants having an injurious fallc | |||
| 6-month follow-up | 8 (22%), n=36 | 9 (25%), n=36 | Odds ratio: 1.09 (0.33, 3.56) p = 0.89 |
Notes: aFollow-up (min, max), median months = (0.30, 8.25), 6.41. Calculation of falls rate takes into account length of follow-up and so includes all participants. bOne person with dementia in the control group had 17 falls. When this participant was excluded from the analysis, the falls rate ratio changed to 0.46 (95% CI = 0.21, 1.03), p = 0.060. Hypothetically, if this one person had been randomised to the Tai Chi group instead of the control group and they had not participated in the intervention, and they again had 17 falls, then the intention to treat analysis would suggest that the number of falls in each group would have been identical. However, in this hypothetical scenario, the per protocol analysis would exclude this individual and so the incidence of falls would then be as above with a falls rate ratio of 0.46 (95% CI = 0.21, 1.03), p = 0.060. cCalculation of proportion of fallers only includes those who were followed up at 6 months.