Does the ‘Otago exercise programme’ reduce mortality and falls in older adults?: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Age Ageing
ABSTRACT the 'Otago exercise programme' (OEP) is a strength and balance retraining programme designed to prevent falls in older people living in the community. The aim of this review was to evaluate the effect of the OEP on the risk of death and fall rates and to explore levels of compliance with the OEP in older adults.
a systematic review with meta-analysis. Clinical trials where the OEP was the primary intervention and participants were community-dwelling older adults (65+) were included. Outcomes of interest included risk of death, number of falls, number of injurious falls and compliance to the exercise programme.
seven trials, involving 1503 participants were included. The mean age of participants was 81.6 (±3.9) years. The OEP significantly reduced the risk of death over 12 months [risk ratio = 0.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.25-0.80], and significantly reduced fall rates (incidence rate ratio = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.56-0.79). There was no significant difference in the risk of a serious or moderate injury occurring as the result of a fall (risk ratio = 1.05, 95% CI = 0.91-1.22). Of the 747 participants who remained in the studies at 12 months, 274 (36.7%) were still exercising three or more times per week.
the OEP significantly reduces the risk of death and falling in older community-dwelling adults.
- SourceAvailable from: Dawn A Skelton[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: In older adults, diminished balance is associated with reduced physical functioning and an increased risk of falling. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2007. To examine the effects of exercise interventions on balance in older people, aged 60 and over, living in the community or in institutional care. We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 1), MEDLINE and EMBASE (to February 2011). Randomised controlled studies testing the effects of exercise interventions on balance in older people. The primary outcomes of the review were clinical measures of balance. Pairs of review authors independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data from studies. Data were pooled where appropriate. This update included 94 studies (62 new) with 9,917 participants. Most participants were women living in their own home.Most trials were judged at unclear risk of selection bias, generally reflecting inadequate reporting of the randomisation methods, but at high risk of performance bias relating to lack of participant blinding, which is largely unavoidable for these trials. Most studies only reported outcome up to the end of the exercise programme.There were eight categories of exercise programmes. These are listed below together with primary measures of balance for which there was some evidence of a statistically significant effect at the end of the exercise programme. Some trials tested more than one type of exercise. Crucially, the evidence for each outcome was generally from only a few of the trials for each exercise category. 1. Gait, balance, co-ordination and functional tasks (19 studies of which 10 provided primary outcome data): Timed Up & Go test (mean difference (MD) -0.82 s; 95% CI -1.56 to -0.08 s, 114 participants, 4 studies); walking speed (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.43; 95% CI 0.11 to 0.75, 156 participants, 4 studies), and the Berg Balance Scale (MD 3.48 points; 95% CI 2.01 to 4.95 points, 145 participants, 4 studies).2. Strengthening exercise (including resistance or power training) (21 studies of which 11 provided primary outcome data): Timed Up & Go Test (MD -4.30 s; 95% CI -7.60 to -1.00 s, 71 participants, 3 studies); standing on one leg for as long as possible with eyes closed (MD 1.64 s; 95% CI 0.97 to 2.31 s, 120 participants, 3 studies); and walking speed (SMD 0.25; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.46, 375 participants, 8 studies).3. 3D (3 dimensional) exercise (including Tai Chi, qi gong, dance, yoga) (15 studies of which seven provided primary outcome data): Timed Up & Go Test (MD -1.30 s; 95% CI -2.40 to -0.20 s, 44 participants, 1 study); standing on one leg for as long as possible with eyes open (MD 9.60 s; 95% CI 6.64 to 12.56 s, 47 participants, 1 study), and with eyes closed (MD 2.21 s; 95% CI 0.69 to 3.73 s, 48 participants, 1 study); and the Berg Balance Scale (MD 1.06 points; 95% CI 0.37 to 1.76 points, 150 participants, 2 studies).4. General physical activity (walking) (seven studies of which five provided primary outcome data). 5. General physical activity (cycling) (one study which provided data for walking speed). 6. Computerised balance training using visual feedback (two studies, neither of which provided primary outcome data). 7. Vibration platform used as intervention (three studies of which one provided primary outcome data).8. Multiple exercise types (combinations of the above) (43 studies of which 29 provided data for one or more primary outcomes): Timed Up & Go Test (MD -1.63 s; 95% CI -2.28 to -0.98 s, 635 participants, 12 studies); standing on one leg for as long as possible with eyes open (MD 5.03 s; 95% CI 1.19 to 8.87 s, 545 participants, 9 studies), and with eyes closed ((MD 1.60 s; 95% CI -0.01 to 3.20 s, 176 participants, 2 studies); walking speed (SMD 0.04; 95% CI -0.10 to 0.17, 818 participants, 15 studies); and the Berg Balance Scale ((MD 1.84 points; 95% CI 0.71 to 2.97 points, 80 participants, 2 studies).Few adverse events were reported but most studies did not monitor or report adverse events.In general, the more effective programmes ran three times a week for three months and involved dynamic exercise in standing. There is weak evidence that some types of exercise (gait, balance, co-ordination and functional tasks; strengthening exercise; 3D exercise and multiple exercise types) are moderately effective, immediately post intervention, in improving clinical balance outcomes in older people. Such interventions are probably safe. There is either no or insufficient evidence to draw any conclusions for general physical activity (walking or cycling) and exercise involving computerised balance programmes or vibration plates. Further high methodological quality research using core outcome measures and adequate surveillance is required.Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) 01/2011; 11(11):CD004963. DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD004963.pub3 · 5.94 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Falls are the leading cause of emergency department visits, hospital admissions, and unintentional death for older adults. Balance and strength impairments are common falls risk factors for community-dwelling older adults. Though physical therapists commonly treat balance and strength, standardized falls screening has not been fully incorporated into physical therapy practice and there is much variation in the frequency, intensity, and duration of therapy prescribed to achieve optimal results. For community-dwelling older adults, a progressive exercise program that focuses on moderate to high-intensity balance exercises appears to be one of the most effective interventions to prevent falls. For more frail older adults in institutional settings, exercise programs in addition to multifactorial interventions appear to show promise as effective falls prevention interventions. The minimum dose of exercise to protect an older adult against falls is 50 hours. This article describes the current best practices for physical therapists to effectively improve balance and manage falls risk in patients. The unique challenges and opportunities for physical therapists to incorporate evidence-based fall-prevention strategies are discussed. Innovative practice models incorporating evidence-based fall-prevention programs and partnerships with public health and aging service providers to create a continuum of care and achieve the optimal dose of balance training are presented.07/2011; 34(3):100-8. DOI:10.1519/JPT.0b013e31822938ac
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Exercise is an effective intervention for the prevention of falls; however, some forms of exercises have been shown to be more effective than others. There is a need to identify effective and efficient methods for training health professionals in exercise prescription for falls prevention. The objective of our study was to compare two approaches for training clinicians in prescribing exercise to prevent falls. This study was a head-to-head randomized trial design. Participants were physiotherapists, occupational therapists, nurses, and exercise physiologists working in Victoria, Australia. Participants randomly assigned to one group received face-to-face traditional education using a 1-day seminar format with additional video and written support material. The other participants received Web-based delivery of the equivalent educational material over a 4-week period with remote tutor facilitation. Outcomes were measured across levels 1 to 3 of Kirkpatrick's hierarchy of educational outcomes, including attendance, adherence, satisfaction, knowledge, and self-reported change in practice. Of the 166 participants initially recruited, there was gradual attrition from randomization to participation in the trial (n = 67 Web-based, n = 68 face-to-face), to completion of the educational content (n = 44 Web-based, n = 50 face-to-face), to completion of the posteducation examinations (n = 43 Web-based, n = 49 face-to-face). Participant satisfaction was not significantly different between the intervention groups: mean (SD) satisfaction with content and relevance of course material was 25.73 (5.14) in the Web-based and 26.11 (5.41) in the face-to-face group; linear regression P = .75; and mean (SD) satisfaction with course facilitation and support was 11.61 (2.00) in the Web-based and 12.08 (1.54) in the face-to-face group; linear regression P = .25. Knowledge test results were comparable between the Web-based and face-to-face groups: median (interquartile range [IQR]) for the Web-based group was 90.00 (70.89-90.67) and for the face-to-face group was 80.56 (70.67-90.00); rank sum P = .07. The median (IQR) scores for the exercise assignment were also comparable: Web-based, 78.6 (68.5-85.1), and face-to-face, 78.6 (70.8-86.9); rank sum P = .61. No significant difference was identified in Kirkpatrick's hierarchy domain change in practice: mean (SD) Web-based, 21.75 (4.40), and face-to-face, 21.88 (3.24); linear regression P = .89. Web-based and face-to-face approaches to the delivery of education to clinicians on the subject of exercise prescription for falls prevention produced equivalent results in all of the outcome domains. Practical considerations should arguably drive choice of delivery method, which may favor Web-based provision for its ability to overcome access issues for health professionals in regional and remote settings. Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry number: ACTRN12610000135011; http://www.anzctr.org.au/ACTRN12610000135011.aspx (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/63MicDjPV).Journal of Medical Internet Research 10/2011; 13(4):e116. DOI:10.2196/jmir.1680 · 4.67 Impact Factor