Skip to main content
. 2022 Sep 7;2022(9):CD001704. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001704.pub5

1. Key characteristics of participants and intervention approach.

Study ID Age (mean) % women Gait speed in control group at follow‐up (m/s) Duration of intervention (weeks) Type of intervention (ProFaNE) Intervention delivered by expert health provider Exclusion criterion based on impaired cognition
Baker 1991 84 100% 0.43 Not specified Balance, gait & functional Yes No
Binder 2004 80 74% 0.99 24 Balance, gait & functional; resistance Yes Yes
Bischoff‐Ferrari 2010 84 79% NR 52 Balance, gait & functional Yes Yes
Braid 2008 81 92% NR 6 Electrical stimulation Yes Yes
Gorodetskyi 2007 71 67% NR 1.5 Electrical stimulation Yes No
Graham 1968 NR NR NR Early WB v late WB Balance, gait & functional Unclear No
Hauer 2002 81 100% 0.44 12 Balance, gait & functional; resistance Unclear Yes
Karumo 1977 73 75% NR 4.7 Balance, gait & functional Yes No
Kimmel 2016 81 64% NR 1 Balance, gait & functional Yes No
Kronborg 2017 80 77% NR 10 days (or discharge, if discharged prior) Resistance Yes Yes
Lamb 2002 84 100% 0.43 6 Electrical stimulation No Yes
Langford 2015 83 63% 0.83 16 Other (telephone support and coaching) Yes Yes
Latham 2014 78 69% NR 24 Balance, gait & functional Yes Yes
Lauridsen 2002 80 100% NR 2 Balance, gait & functional Yes No
Magaziner 2019 81 77% 0.74 16 Resistance; endurance Yes No
Mangione 2005 79 73% 0.65 12 Resistance; endurance Yes Yes
Mangione 2010 81 81% 0.91 10 Resistance Yes Yes
Miller 2006 84 77% 0.5 12 Resistance Yes Yes
Mitchell 2001 80 84% 0.42 6 Balance, gait & functional; resistance Unclear Yes
Monticone 2018 77 71% NR 3 Balance, gait & functional Yes Yes
Moseley 2009 84 81% 0.6 16 Balance, gait & functional Yes Yes
Oh 2020
  79 68% NR 2 Balance, gait & functional
  Yes Yesa
Ohoka 2015 90 100% 0.35 12 Balance, gait & functional Yes No
Oldmeadow 2006 79 68% NR 1 Balance, gait & functional Yes No
Orwig 2011 82 100% NR 52 Resistance; endurance; other (self‐efficacy‐based motivational component) No Yes
Pol 2019 80 89% NR 12 Other (cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), CBT plus sensory monitoring) Yes No
Resnick 2007 81 100% NR 52 Resistance; endurance; other (motivational interventions) No Yes
Salpakoski 2015 80 78% 0.97 52 Balance, gait & functional Yes Yes
Sherrington 1997 79 79% 0.5 4 Balance, gait & functional Yes Yes
Sherrington 2003 81 68% 0.19 2 Balance, gait & functional Yes Yes
Sherrington 2004
(WB group; NWB group)
79 80% 0.55; 0.62 16 Balance, gait & functional; other (specific group of muscle contractions in supine) Yes Yes
Sherrington 2020 78 76% 0.83 52 Balance, gait & functional Yes Yes
Stasi 2019 78 75% NR 12 Resistance Yes No
Suwanpasu 2014 75 66% NR 6 Other (physical activity enhancing program, based on Resnick's self‐efficacy model) No No
Sylliaas 2011 82 83% 0.51 12 Resistance Yes Yes
Sylliaas 2012 82 81% 0.8 12 Resistance Yes Yes
Taraldsen 2019 83 77% 0.62 10 Balance, gait & functional Yes No
Tsauo 2005 73 80% 0.33 12 Balance, gait & functional Yes Yes
Van Ooijen 2016 83 73% 0.72 6 Balance, gait & functional Yes Yes
Williams 2016 79 75% 0.8 12 Balance, gait & functional; other (workbook and goal setting diary) Yes Yes

NR: not reported; NWB: non‐weight bearing; WB: weight bearing
aParticipants with severe cognitive dysfunction (obey command ≤ 1 step ) were excluded. At baseline, 21/38 participants had cognitive dysfunction, defined using Mini‐Mental State Examination score adjusted with age and education level.