Background
Methods
Literature search strategy
Inclusion/exclusion criteria
Data extraction and analysis
Quality assessment of included studies
Results
Identified studies
Description of included studies
Study, sample size | Intervention vs control (content, dose) | Sample characteristics | Main results | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Within-group | Between-group | |||
Cognitive-motor only
| ||||
Schoene 2013 [58] N = 32 | IG: DDR + CSRT 8 wk, 2-3/wk, 20 min | Independent living (retirement village); age 78 (5), 69–85; able to walk without a walking aid for 20 m, able to step in place unassisted; no disabilities in ADL/IADL functions; no cognitive impairment (MMSE < 24); no neurodegenerative disease; no other health problems affecting stepping ability; no unstable health conditions |
Unpublished
| |
+
|
+
| |||
CSRT RT pre 754 (81) post 679 (67) p = .008, | CSRT (F31,1) = 18.203, p < .001, | |||
CG: Passive | ||||
CSRT MT pre 252 (44) post 210 (47) p = .035 | PPA (F31,1) = 12.706, p < .001, | |||
PPA pre 1.75 (0.64) post 1.15 (0.85) p < .001 | sway velocity (F31,1) = 4.226, p = .049 | |||
Sway mm pre 386 (132) post 301 (133) p = .001 | contrast sensitivity (F31,1) = 4.415, p = .044 | |||
proprioception pre 3.0 (1.7) post 2.3 (1.1) p = .091 | DT TUG (F31,1) = 4.226, p = .049; | |||
STS pre 11.5 (2.3) post 10.7 (2.8) p = .032 | SST p = .094; | |||
DT TUG pre 14.1 (5.6) post 11.6 (3.7) p = .002 | ||||
SST pre 50.8 (17.2) post 42.0 (6.8) p = .05 | ||||
No hand RT, contrast sensitivity, lower limb strength, AST, TUG, icon-FES, TMT A + B |
No proprioception, hand RT, lower limb strength, STS, AST, TUG, icon-FES, TMT A + B | |||
Studenski 2010 [55] N= 25 | IG: DDR 12 wk, 2/wk, 30 min | Community-dwelling; age 80.2 (5.4), 65+; healthy; able to walk 0.5 miles |
+ narrow walk time pre 5.2 (1.7) change −0.5 (1.6), p = .03 and ABC pre 84.5 (13) change 4.9 (10.1), p = .01; | |
CG: N/A |
No change DSST -balance subscore SPPB | |||
Lai 2012 [50] N = 30 | IG: XMSS 6 wk, 3/wk, 30 min | Community-dwelling; age 72.1 (4.8), 65+; ambulant without walking aids; no neurological disorder; no arthritis or visual or cardiac impairment that affects walking |
+
| |
BBS pre 50.53(4.75) post 53.87(3.56), p = .001, | ||||
TUG pre 9.54(3.52) post 8.54(2.85), p = .046, sway area eyes open and closed pre (320.80(273.45) post 191.00(70.31), p = .052, pre 342.54(213.67) post 262.20(142.11), p = .092 respectively) sway velocity eyes open and closed pre (9.37(2.30) post 8.10(1.62), p = .046, pre 13.11(5.12) post 11.28(3.55), p = .024 respectively) | ||||
CG: Passive | ||||
OLS pre 31.80(18.39) post 48.74(26.67), p = .062 | ||||
MFES pre 131.13(6.56) post 136(6.07), p = .001 | ||||
Cognitive-motor plus other components
| ||||
De Bruin 2011 [59] N = 28 | IG: DDR + strength and balance 12 wk, 2/wk, 45-60 min | Assisted living facilities; age 86.2 (7.1), 65+; ambulant without walking aids; no neurological disorder; no arthritis or visual or cardiac impairment that affects walking |
+
|
+
|
DTC: gait speed pre 22 (12.1) post 14.4 (8.6), p = .006, cadence pre 15.8 (13.7) post 10 (7.3), p = .06; stride time pre 20.7 (14.5) post 11.6 (10) p = .004, and step length pre 11.1 (8.3) post 5.5 (5.4) p = .001; FES-I: pre 24.9 (4.5) post 21.9 (5.2), p = .005 | DTC: gait speed F(1,26) = 6.25, p = .019, stride time (s) F(1,26) = 5.7, p = .025, step length (cm) F(1,26) = 11.51, p = .002, FES-I: F(1,26) = 2.95, p = .098 | |||
CG: Mostly seated exercises 12 wk, 1/wk, 30-45 min | ||||
No
|
No
| |||
ETGUG, DT step time | DTC Cadence, DTC of step time, ETGUG | |||
Pichierri | IG: | Hostels for the |
+
|
+
|
2012a [62] N = 31 | DDR + strength and balance 12 wk, 2/wk, 50-60 min | elderly; age 86.2 (4.6), 65+; 50% considered high fall-risk; no major cognitive impairment (MMSE ≥ 22); able to walk 8 m; no acute or chronic unstable illness; adequate vision | ST and DT Improvements throughout most walking conditions; | DT gait speed (U = 26, p = .041, r = .45) and single support time (U = 24, p = .029, r = .48) fast walking condition No ST gait, and some parameters DT gait |
DTC decreased throughout most parameters in ST and DT walking No FES-I | ||||
FES-I | ||||
CG: Strength and balance 12 wk, 2/wk, 40 min | ||||
Pichierri 2012b [61] N = 15 | IG: DDR + strength and balance 12 wk, 2/wk, 60 min | Care homes; age 84.6 (4), 65+; no major cognitive impairment (MMSE ≥ 22); able to stand upright for 5 min; no acute or chronic unstable illness; adequate vision |
+
|
+
|
step reaction time: time reduction in all assessed temporal parameters ST: −15.7%; DT: −20.1%; step directions with significance and step directions with a trend to significance for step initiation, foot off, and foot contact times for most variables | step reaction time: initiation time of forward steps under DT (U = 9, p = .034, r = .55) and backward steps under DT conditions (U = 10, p = .045, r = .52) | |||
CG: Non-specific physical activities depending on activity | ||||
No
| ||||
ST conditions step reaction time | ||||
DT most other variables of step initiation, lift-off and movement speed |
Study, sample size | Intervention vs control (content, dose) | Sample characteristics | Main findings | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Within-group | Between-group | |||
Cognitive-motor only
| ||||
Orsega-Smith 2012 [52] N = 34 | IG1: WBB balance + strength 4 wk, 2/wk, 30 min | Community-dwelling; age 72.1 (7.8), 55–86; independent, 88% self-reported health good or very good, 0% poor; overweight (mean BMI 27.19 (4.99); high-functioning (ceiling effect in several measures |
+
|
+
|
IG1 | IG1 vs CG: | |||
BBS pre 51.69 (10.05) post 53.13 (8.48), p < .05 | BBS mean difference 2.33 (0.77), p = .004 | |||
IG2: WBB balance + strength 8 wk, 2/wk, 30 min | ||||
STS pre 11.81 (3.62) post 13.69 (3.89), p < .01, | STS mean difference 2.54 (0.69), p = .002 | |||
ADL pre 126.14 (19.53) post 130.36 (12.70), p < .05 | IG2 vs CG: | |||
IG2 | BBS p = .05 | |||
BBS pre 54.22 (1.79) post 55.44 (0.89 3), p < .05 | STS p = .10 | |||
TUG pre 7.14 (1.08) post 6.74 (0.76), p = .06 | ||||
CG: Passive | ADL pre 130.22 (8.00) post 135.00 (3.50), p < .05 |
No
| ||
ABC pre 87.85 (11.19) post 93.93 (5.52), p < .05 | IG1 vs IG2: no sig differences in any measure | |||
IG1 vs CG: TUG | ||||
No
| IG2: vs CG:TUG | |||
IG1: TUG, ABC, FES | ||||
IG2: STS, FES | ||||
Bieryla 2013 [64] N = 9 | IG: WBB balance + strength 3 wk, 3/wk, 30 min | Community-dwelling; age 70+; 70–92; 81.5 (5.5); healthy; able to stand unassisted for 30 minutes; walk a minimum of 6 meters without aid |
+ follow-up (1mo) | |
BBS pre 50 (47.5-51.5) follow-up 53 (52–54), p = .046 | ||||
CG: N/A (reported as RCT but only within group analysis) | ||||
No
| ||||
Post: BBS, FAB, FR , TUG follow-up: FAB, FR, TUG | ||||
Young 2010 [56] N = 6 | IG: WBB balance (custom-made) 4 wk, 10 sessions, 20 min | Community-dwelling; age 84.1 (5.1); healthy; no falls past year |
+ sway variability decreased in EC A-P t(5) = 3.042; p = .03, | |
No
| ||||
CG: N/A | Sway variability EO and EC M-L | |||
Kim 2013 [48] N = 32 | IG: slow static balance and strength 8 wk, 3/wk, 60 min | Community-dwelling; age IG 68.3 (3.7), CG 66.2 (3.9); 65–75; independently ambulatory; able to stand on 1 leg for 15 seconds without any assistance; no history of orthopedic or neurologic surgery; MMSE ≥ 24; no dementia, cardiovascular disease, headache or dizziness |
+
|
+
|
Hip extension 55%, flexion 29.9%, adduction 48.6%, abduction 41.9%, all p < .001 | All hip muscles (p < .001 | |||
CG: passive | ||||
GRF backward stepping EO 15.4% p = .004, EC 11.5% p = .044 | GRF backward stepping test EC p = .028 | |||
GRF cross-over stepping EO 28.7% p < .001, EC 26.6% p < .001 | GRF cross-over stepping test EC p = .013 | |||
No GRF EO backward and cross-over stepping | ||||
IG: Static balance 6 wk, 3/wk, 20 min | Community-dwelling; age 77 (5), 65+; healthy; highly motivated to exercise; able to walk without aids; no orthopedic or neurological disorders which prevent them from walking without aids or pressing the buttons on the interface; adequate vision; no cognitive impairments | + BBS p < .01 Figure-of-eight p < .01 | ||
CG: passive (cross-over) | ||||
No Tandem, OLS with EO/EC | ||||
Bisson 2007 [46] N = 24 | IG: IREX, static standing 10 wk, 2/wk, 30 min | Community-dwelling; age 74.4 (4.3), 65+; no walking aids; no major cognitive impairment (MMSE > 19); no unexplained falls last year; no peripheral neuropathy, an uncontrolled heart problem, severe arthritis, severe back pain, a recent leg injury (last 6 mo), tunnel vision, or any vestibular problem |
+ CB&M pre 58.6, post 64.2, follow-up 64.7 F(2,46) = 14.5, p < 0.01 |
No CB&M, RT , Sway no differences between groups and no training effect |
RT main effect of time F(2,44) = 10.30, p < 0.01, no change between post and follow-up | ||||
No Sway | ||||
CG: Biofeedback training on force plate 10 wk, 2/wk, 30 min | ||||
Pluchino 2012 [53] N = 27 | IG: WBB balance + strength 8 wk, 2/wk, 60 min | Community-dwelling; age 72.5 (8.4) of n = 40; independent; no neurologic disorders affecting balance; no severe cognitive impairment; no major depression; no unstable disease; no severe vestibular problems; no assistance in ADL |
+ DMA score pre 808.75 (98.17) post 761.13 (131.75), p = .036 No FROP-COM, TUG, OLS, POMA gait, POMA balance, FR, FES - Sway area pre −0.39 (0.23) post 1.65 (1.47), p < .001 (!) |
No FROP-COM, TUG, OLS, POMA, FR, Sway, dynamic posturography, FES |
CG1: balance | ||||
Sway velocity pre 1.67 (0.57) post 1.90 (0.71), p = .013 | ||||
CG2: Tai Chi Both 8 wk, 2/wk, 60 min | ||||
Chen 2012 [47] N = 40 | IG: Static balance and strength (power) 6 wk, 2/wk, 30 min | Community-dwelling; age 75.9 (7.9), 65+; no dizziness/vertigo, degenerative neurological diseases, stroke, lower limbs fractures, cardio-pulmonary distress and any sensory, visual, auditory or cognitive impairment that would hinder testing procedures; no medication known to affect balance |
+ POMA pre 15.68 (1.38) post 23.33 (2.29), p < .001, +50% |
+ POMA p < .05 |
TUG p < .05 | ||||
CG: Strength and balance 6 wk, 2/wk, 30 min | STS p < .05 | |||
Power p < .05 | ||||
mFES p < .05 | ||||
FR pre 16.49 (3.37) post 22.26 (4.21), p < .001, +35% |
No FR | |||
TUG pre 17.15 (4.49) post 12.90 (3.07), p = .026, −25% | ||||
STS pre 17.20 (3.51) post 12.46 (2.99), p = .004, −28% | ||||
Muscle power pre 4.56 (1.43) post 7.47(2.81), p < .001, +64% mFES pre 5.52 (1.28) post 8.14 (0.94), p = .002, +47% | ||||
Suarez 2006 [41] N = 26 | IG: Static balance under changing sensory conditions 6 wk, daily, 40 min | Outpatient clinic; age 73–82; balance disorder; >2 falls in last year; no musculoskeletal disorders, no dementia; no PD or neuropathy |
+ Sway area normal standing pre 10.4 (2.3) post 3.5 (1.4), p < .001 | |
CG: N/A | ||||
Sway area optokinetic stimulation pre 22.4 (4.3) post 10.4 (4.2), p < .001 | ||||
Sway velocity normal standing pre 3.2 (0.5) post 2.4 (0.4), p < .001 | ||||
Sway velocity optokinetic stimulation pre 4.9 (1.4) post 2.9 (0.3), p < .001 | ||||
Duque 2013 [40] N = 28 (within) N = 58 (between) | IG: Static balance under changing sensory conditions plus ususal care (sham) 6 wk, 2/wk, 30 min | Community-dwelling; age 65+; IG 79.3 (10); CG 75 (8); falls and fracture clinic; at least 1 fall past 6 mo; poor balance; ambulate independently with a cane or walker; able to stand unaided for 60secs; MMSE ≥ 22; no PD, or neuromuscular condition; GDS ≤ 7; no severe visual impairment |
+ 6 wk |
+ 9mo falls 1.1 (0.7) vs CG 2 (0.2), p < .01 |
LOS 31%, p < .01 Sway area EC hard surface −33%; EC foam −52%, optokinetic stimulation 25%, Sway velocity vertical 50%, horizontal 33%, all p < .01 | LOS, p < .01 Sway area optokinetic stimulation, p < .01 | |||
CG: Usual care (Sham) | ||||
Sway velocity horizontal and vertical optokinetic stimulation, p < .01 | ||||
SAFFE , p < .01 | ||||
No Sway area standing hard surface/foam | ||||
Padala 2012 [36] N = 22 | IG: WBB balance + strength 8 wk, 5/wk, 30 min | Assisted living facility; age 80.5 (7.5), 60+; mild AD; MMSE ≥ 18; excluded: myocardial infarction, transient ischemic attack or stroke in the previous 6 mo, serious mental illness which impacted memory, active cancer diagnosis with the exception of skin cancer, poor prognosis for survival (e.g., severe congestive heart failure), severe sensory (visual or auditory) or musculoskeletal impairments, or a required use of a wheel-chair for ambulation; 44% walking aid; mean 3.2 comorbidities |
+ BBS change 6.27 (5.27), p003 |
No BBS, POMA, TUG, ADL, IADLs, MMSE |
CG: Walking 8 wk, 5/wk, 30 min | ||||
POMA change 1.82 (2.04), p = .013 | ||||
No TUG, ADL, IADL, MMSE | ||||
Szturm 2011 [63] N = 27 | IG: static balance on firm or compliant surface 8 wk, 2/wk, 45 min | Geriatric day hospital; age 80.7 (6.5), 65–85; no cognitive impairment (MMSE > 24); independent ambulant; no condition or disability that prevents participation; 89% walking aids; mean gait speed <0.7 m/s |
+ BBS p < .001 TUG p = .07 LOB p = .03 ABC p < .05 |
+ BBS t = 5.9, df = 24, p < .001 |
TUG t = 1.87, df = 25, p = .08 | ||||
No Gait speed | ||||
LOB U = 37.2, p = .007 | ||||
ABC U = 44.5, p = .02 | ||||
No
| ||||
Gait speed | ||||
CG: Strength, aerobics, balance | ||||
Yen 2011 [34] N = 42 | IG: Static balance with tilt 6 wk, 2/wk, 30 min CG1: balance (incl. tilt board) 6 wk, 2/wk, 30 min | Outpatient clinic; age 70.7 (6.4); idiopathic PD (Hoehn and Yahr stages II and III); no cognitive impairment (MMSE > 24); no uncontrolled chronic diseases; no other neurological, cardiovascular or orthopaedic disorders affecting postural stability; no on-off motor fluctuation; no dyskinesia > grade 3 (UPDRS) |
+ SOT-6 pre 37.4 (25.3-49.4) post 54.3 (44.1-64.5) follow-up 48.6 (36.8-60.4), p < .05/3 |
+ Vs CG 2: DT SOT-6, p < .05/3 |
DT SOT-6 pre 39.9 (27.9-52.0) post 55.3 (43.7-66.9) follow-up 52.6 (41.3-66.9), p < .05/3 |
No Vs CG 1: no in any measures Vs CG 2: ST SOT-6 | |||
CG2: none | ||||
ST SOT 1–5 DT SOT 1–5 Verbal RT | ||||
No SOT 1–5 Verbal RT DT SOT 1-5 | ||||
Cognitive-motor plus other components
| ||||
Franco 2012 [57] N = 32 | IG: WBB plus strength and balance 3 wk, 2/wk, 10-15 min + daily 15 min | Independent-living facility; age 78.3 (6); able to walk independently; adequate vision; able to stand for at least 2 min; no reduced weight-bearing capability; cognitively able to understand instructions |
+ BBS F(1,29) = 17.034, p < .001, change 3.55 (5.03) |
No BBS, POMA |
POMA F(1,29) = 9.715, p < .004, change 0.91 (2.39) | ||||
CG1: strength and balance 3 wk, 2/wk, 30-45 min | ||||
CG2: none | ||||
Fung 2012 [35] N = 50 | IG: WBB plus strength and balance (TKR) | Outpatient clinic; age 68 (11); following knee replacement; full lower extremity weight bearing; no active painful OA in lower limb; no visual impairment |
No knee extension, knee flexion and ABC | |
LOS, 2/wk, 15 min + 2/wk, 60 min? | ||||
CG: Balance + strength | ||||
LOS, 2/wk, 60 min | ||||
Griffin 2012 [44] N = 65 | IG: WBB plus strength and balance 7 wk? CG: strength and balance 7 wk? | Age 83.2 (5.5), 67–90; met the existing criteria to join the falls prevention training group (poor performance TUG, FR, 180 degree turn, flexibility); |
+TUG −17% FR |
+ TUG FR |
No OLS |
No OLS | |||
Kubicki 2014 [45] N = 32 | IG: Fovea, static standing (position/foam/unstable plate according to individual’s ability) + strength and balance; 3 wk, 2/wk, 10 sequences + 3 wk, 3/wk, 30 min | Short-term rehabilitation service; age 71–94; IG 82.2 (6.9), CG 81.5 (5.0); frail (Fried criteria); balance disorder; able to stand unassisted; multiple causes for hospitalisation; no pyramidal or extra-pyramidal syndrome or neuropathy; MMSE ≥24; gait speed = 0.65 (0.23) |
+ Hand RT (ms) pre 605 (244) post 446 (110), p < .05 |
+ Hand RT F1,29 = 5.057, p = 0.032 |
No Sway (mean velocity) TUG ST gait DT gait | ||||
-Sway velocity (APA) F(1,29) = 8.031, p < 0.01 (!) | ||||
CG: strength and balance; 3 wk, 3/wk, 30 min | ||||
Sway velocity (acc) p = .075 |
Study, sample size | Intervention vs Control (content, dose) | Sample characteristics | Main findings | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Within-group | Between-group | |||
Cognitive-motor only
| ||||
Agmon 2011 [43] N = 7 | IG1: Static balance, strength, aerobics 12 wk, 3/wk, 30 min (5 sessions in first wk) | Continuing care retirement; age 84 (5), 65+; impaired balance (BBS < 52 points); able to walk 4 m without assistive device; no cognitive impairment ty 8(Brief Screen for Cognitive Impairment ≤4); no musculoskeletal or neurologic disorder; no routine use of walking aids; adequate vision and hearing; |
+ BBS pre 49 (2.1) post 53 (1.8), p = .017 Gait speed pre 1.04 (0.2) post 1.33 (0.84) m/s, p = .018 | |
CG: N/A | ||||
Maillot 2012 [51] N = 30 | IG: Static balance, strength, aerobics 12 wk, 2/wk, 60 min | Community-dwelling; age 73.5 (3.6), 65–78; self-rated health better than bad; sedentary; no visual or auditory impairment; no cognitive impairment (mean MMSE = 29 (1)) |
+ Physical Wilk’s Λ = .31, F(10, 18) = 4.06, p = .005 | |
TUG change −0.94 (0.62) t = 4.53, p < .01 | ||||
CG: passive | ||||
STS change 2.73 (2.28), t = −4.91, p < .01 | ||||
EF Wilk’s Λ = .19, F(6, 23) = 15.79, p = .001 | ||||
TMT B-A change −15.42 (20.27), t = −2.12, p = .04 | ||||
Stroop incongruent (number) change 9.13 (8.80), t = −3.412, p < .01 | ||||
Processing speed Wilk’s Λ = .21, F(8, 21) = 9.75, p = .001 | ||||
Cancellation (Number) change 10.00 (6.09), t = −5.423, p = .01 | ||||
simple RT (ms) change −103 (93), t = 3.962, p < .01 | ||||
choice RT (ms) change −104 (74), t = 3.082, p < .01 | ||||
No Visuo-spatial | ||||
Williams 2010 [42] N = 15 | IG: Static balance, strength, aerobics 12 wk, 2/wk, individual (most 15 min) | 76% community-dwelling; age 76.7 (5.1) of n = 21, 70+; fall past year; no severe cognitive impairment (Abbreviated Mental Test ≥ 7); no wheelchair; 48% walking aid |
+ BBS 4 wk pre 43.7 (9.5) post 48.1 (7.2), p = .02 | |
No POMA 4/12 wk, FES-I 4/12 wk, BBS 12 wk | ||||
CG: N/A (reported as CCT but only within group analysis) | ||||
Laver 2012 [37] N = 44 | IG: Static balance, strength, aerobics → individual treatment needs | Rehabilitation hospital; age 84.9 (4.5), 65+; no major cognitive impairment (MMSE ≥ 21); able to perform sit to stand without assistance; previously ambulating independently; adequate vision; various causes for hospitalisation |
+ FIM pre 100.45 (16.71) post 108.64 (15.78), p < .001 |
+ change in outcome based on number of sessions during hospital stay: IG improved on average 1.26 s/session on the TUG (p = 0.048) and performed better per session on the MBBS (p = 0.042) than CG |
No mBBS, TUG, IADL, ABC | ||||
LOS, 5/wk, 25 min | ||||
No mBBS, TUG, SPPB, IADL , FIM, ABC | ||||
CG: Physio to maximise functional mobility (walking and transfers) | ||||
LOS, 5/wk, 25 min | ||||
Cognitive-motor plus other components
| ||||
Mendes 2012 [31] N = 27 | IG: Static balance, strength, aerobics + mobility 7 wk, 2/wk, 10 games/2 attempts per game + 30 min | Community-dwelling; age 68.6 (6.4); PD (Hoehn and Yahr I and II); no other problems; no other neurological disorder; no orthopaedic problems; no cognitive impairment (MMSE ≥ 24); GDS (15 items) < 6; no visual or auditory impairment |
+ FR 1 wk p = .003, 3mo p = .02 | |
CG: N/A | ||||
Pompeu 2012 [33] N = 32 | IG: Static balance, strength, aerobics + strength and mobility 7 wk, 2/wk, 30 min + 30 min | Age 60–85, 67.4 (8.1); idiopathic PD; Hoehn and Yahr stage 1–2; good visual and auditory acuity; no other neurological disorder or orthopaedic disorder; no cognitive impairment (MMSE ≥ 24), no depression (GDS-15 score <6) |
+ BBS pre 52.9 (4.1) post 54.4 (2.2) follow-up54.1 (2.0), p < .005 |
No BBS, OLS, MOCA, DT |
OLS EO pre 23.4 (22.0) post 32.9 (22.6) follow-up 31.2 (23.1), p < .01 | ||||
CG: balance + strength and mobility 7 wk, 2/wk, 30 min + 30 min | ||||
MOCA pre 20.6 (4.5) post 22.2 (4.5) follow-up 21.8 (4.5), p < .001 | ||||
No OLS EC, DT | ||||
Rendon 2012 [54] N = 40 | IG: WBB balance + strength plus cycling 6 wk, 3/wk, 35-45 min | Outpatient clinic; community-dwelling; age 60–95, 84.5 (5.3); able to participate in physical activity for 45–60 min; self-reported normal vision; no orthopaedic, neurological or circulatory disorders that prevent participation; 15% walking aids; No participant was able to complete the entire series of exercises without the use of the assistive device at least one time |
+ TUG p = .038 | |
CG: passive | ABC p = .038 | |||
No Depression | ||||
Chao 2013 [65] N = 7 | IG: Static balance, strength, aerobics + health education and self-efficacy 8 wk, 2/wk, 30 min + 30 min | Assisted living facility; age 80–94; 65+; 86 (5); able to ambulate with or without an assistive device; able to understand instructions; medically stable; no contraindications for exercise; n = 3 cognitive deficit; |
+ BBS pre40.9 (8.5) post 45.1 (6.3), p = .017 | |
TUG pre19.4 (5.5) post 15.8 (5.1), p = .063 | ||||
CG: N/A | FES pre31.3 (15.7) post 23.6 (14.1), p = .058 |
Study, sample size | Intervention vs control (content, dose) | Sample characteristics | Main findings | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Within-group | Between-group | |||
Cognitive-motor only
| ||||
Lee 2013 [38] N = 55 | IG: RT, aerobics, strength, coordination, low level balance (3D, static and dynamic) – higher intensity 10 wk, 2/wk, 50 min, education: twice 50 min | Diabetes; age 65+; IG 73.78 (4.77), CG 74.29 (5.20); independent walking; no intellectual disabilities; 24/55 fall past year |
+ BBS pre 51.67(2.48) post 53.41 (.89), p < .001 | |
STS pre 17.51(5.46) post 13.78 (2.86), p < .001 | ||||
CG: N/A (reported as RCT but only within group analysis) | FR pre 28.22 (6.86) post 32.50 (6.31), p < .001 | |||
TUG pre 11.48 (2.31) post 9.78 (1.58), p < .001 | ||||
OLS pre 15.85 (8.26) 21.75 post (8.11), p < .001 | ||||
Gait speed pre 93.16 (18.97) post 102.87 (16.56), p < .001 | ||||
Cadence pre 101.95 (11.81) post 109.92 (10.94), p < .001 | ||||
mFES pre 6.75 (1.7)9 post 8.11 (1.11), p = .002 | ||||
Rosenberg 2010 [30] N = 19 | IG: Wii sports unstructured– higher intensity 12 wk, 3/wk, 35 min | Community-dwelling;age 78.7 (8.7); 63–94; subsyndromal depression; no major depression, primary anxiety disorder, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, or substance use disorder (Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview); no cognitive impairment (MMSE < 24); TUG < 14 s; 18% “limited a lot” in performing moderate level physical activity, 35% “limited a little,”, 47% no limitation (SF-36) |
+Depression (Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptoms) pre 7.8 (3.7) 6 wk 4.8 (2.3), p = .002 post 5.1 (3.0) p = .004 | |
CG: N/A | ||||
Cognition (Repeatable Battery for Assessment of Neurocognitive Status) pre 90.7 (18.0) post 95.3 (16.9), p = .032 | ||||
No anxiety (Beck Anxiety Inventory) | ||||
Keogh 2013 [60] N = 26 | IG: Wii sports unstructured– higher intensity 8 wk, individual | Residential aged care; age 83 (8); IG 81 (7), CG 85 (7); able to walk at least 10 meters unaided or with a walking aid; sufficient cognitive ability to understand instructions (standard tools such as the MMSE); sedentary |
No FSST (n = 15/26) p = .199 | |
CG: passive | ||||
Cognitive-motor plus other components
| ||||
Hsu 2011 [29] N = 34 | IG: Wii sports bowling + strength and balance 4 wk, 2/wk, 20 min + 4 wk, 2-4/wk, ? | Long-term care; age 80, 52–97; self-reported upper extremity dysfunction; no major cognitive impairment (determined by staff); 91% walking aid (including wheelchair) |
No STS |
No STS |
CG: strength and balance 4 wk, 2-4/wk, ? | IADL (Nursing Home Physical Performance Test) |
Study, sample size | Intervention vs Control (content, dose) | Sample characteristics | Main findings | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Within-group | Between-group | |||
Cognitive-motor only
| ||||
Mirelman 2011 [32] N = 20 | IG: VR treadmill 6 wk, 3/wk, 45 min | Community-dwelling; age 67.1 (6.5), 55–79; idiopathic PD; moderately impaired (Hoehn and Yahr 2–3); walking difficulties; able to walk unassisted for 5 min; no serious chronic medical condition; no major visual impairment, no major depression; no dementia |
+ gait speed pre 1.16 (0.18) post 1.26 (0.20), p < .05 follow-up 1.28 (0.19), p < .05 Obstacle negotiation |
+ DT gait speed p = .003 |
CG: Treadmill (for some outcomes) 6 wk, 3/wk, 45 min | DT stride length p < .001 | |||
- speed pre 0.96 (0.19) post 1.17 (0.22), p < .05cfollow-up 1.17 (0.20), p < .05 | ||||
- stride length pre 148 (17) post 161 (18), p < .05 follow-up 161 (17), p < .05 | ||||
FSST pre 13.3 (2.5) post 11.6 (1.6), p < .05 follow-up 11.9 (1.6), p < .05 | ||||
TMT A pre 69.0 (15.9) post 57.2 (11.9), p = .003 | ||||
TMT B pre 141.4 (34.9) post 120.4 (18.2), P = .05 | ||||
DTC pre 13.9 (14.8) post 6.9 (8.4), p < .05 | ||||
DT gait speed pre 1.01 (0.23) post 1.17 (0.15), p < .05 follow-up 1.13 (0.17), p < .05 | ||||
No Gait variability, DTC follow-up | ||||
Cognitive-motor plus other components
| ||||
Cho 2013 [39] N = 14 | IG: VR treadmill + therapeutic exercise (lower extremity muscle strength and gait), occupational therapy, and functional electrical stimulation 6 wk, 3/wk, 30 min + exercise 6 wk, 5/wk, 30 min; OT 6 wk, 5/wk, 30 min; stimulation 6 wk, 5/wk, 20 min | Hemiparesis after stroke within 6mo; stroke rehabilitation ward; age IG 64.57 (4.35), CG 65.14 (4.74); able to walk independently both with and without assistive devices; able to understand and follow simple verbal instructions; MMSE > 24; Brunnstrom score between 1 and 4 for the lower extremity; no serious visual impairment or hearing disorder; no severe heart disease or uncontrolled hypertension and pain; no neurologic or orthopedic disease that might interfere with the study |
+ BBS pre 36.71 (2.28) post 40.85 (1.67), p < .05 |
+ BBS p = .011 |
TUG p = .013 | ||||
TUG pre 22.93 (4.29) post 20.67 (3.73), p < .05 | ||||
CG: Treadmill + therapeutic exercise (lower extremity muscle strength and gait), occupational therapy, and functional electrical stimulation 6 wk, 3/wk, 30 min + exercise 6 wk, 5/wk, 30 min; OT 6 wk, 5/wk, 30 min; stimulation 6 wk, 5/wk, 20 min | Gait speed (cm/s) pre 54.27 (16.18) post 79.67 (13.91), p < .05 | Gait speed p = .013 | ||
Cadence pre77.32 (21.91) post 104.04 (10.03), p < .05 | ||||
Cadence p = .035 | ||||
step length pre 38.91 (8.24) post 50.51 (9.74), p < .05 | ||||
No Spatial gait parameters | ||||
stride length pre 79.21 (16.82) post 99.91 (18.74), p < .05 single limb support pre28.17 (4.77) post 33.64 (2.67), p < .05 |
-
filmed community walks projected onto a screen [39]
Methodological quality of included studies
First author, year | Risk assesment items | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | |
Agmon, 2011 [43] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Bieryla, 2013 [64] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Bisson, 2007 [46] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Chao, 2013 [65] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Chen, 2012 [47] | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
Cho, 2013 [39] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
de Bruin, 2011 [59] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Duque, 2013 [40] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
Franco, 2012 [57] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Fung, 2012 [35] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
Griffin, 2012 [44] | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Hsu, 2011 [29] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Keogh, 2013 [60] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Kim, 2013 [48] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Kubicki, 2014 [45] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Lai, 2012 [50] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Laver, 2012 [37] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
Lee, 2013 [38] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
Maillot, 2012 [51] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
Mendes, 2012 [31] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
Mirelman, 2011 [32] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Orsega-Smith, 2012 [52] | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Padala, 2012 [36] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Pichierri, 2012a [62] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Pichierri, 2012b [61] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Pluchino, 2012 [53] | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Pompeu, 2012 [33] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Rendon, 2012 [54] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Rosenberg, 2010 [30] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Schoene, 2013 [58] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Studenski, 2010 [55] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Suarez, 2006 [41] | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Szturm, 2011 [63] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Williams, 2010 [42] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Yen, 2011 [34] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Young, 2010 [56] | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |