4.4 Article

Effects of a simple home-based exercise program on fall prevention in older adults: A 12-month primary care setting, randomized controlled trial

期刊

GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY INTERNATIONAL
卷 17, 期 11, 页码 2157-2163

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ggi.13052

关键词

exercise; fall prevention; primary care; randomized clinical trial

资金

  1. Development potentials of Thai People Project, Mahidol University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

AimTo investigate the effects of a simple home-based exercise program on falls, physical functioning, fear of falling and quality of life in a primary care setting. MethodsParticipants (n = 439), aged 65 years with mild-to-moderate balance dysfunction were randomly assigned to an exercise (n = 219) or control (n = 220) group. The program consisted of five combined exercises, which progressed in difficulty, and a walking plan. Controls received fall prevention education. Physical functioning and other outcomes were measured at 3- and 6-month follow-up visits. Falls were monitored with fall diaries and phone interviews at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months respectively. ResultsThe 12 months of the home-based exercise program showed the incidence of falls was 0.30 falls per person year in the exercise group, compared with 0.40 in the control group. The estimated incidence rate ratio was 0.75 (95% CI 0.55-1.04), which was not statistically significant. The fear of falling (measured by the Thai fall efficacy scale) was significantly lower in the exercise than control group (24.7 vs 27.0, P = 0.003). Also, the trend of program adherence increased in the exercise group. (29.6% to 56.8%). ConclusionsThis simple home-based exercise program showed a reduction in fear of falling and a positive trend towards exercise adherence. Further studies should focus on factors associated with exercise adherence, the benefits of increased home visits and should follow participants longer in order to evaluate the effects of the program. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2017; 17: 2157-2163.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据