scholarly journals Diabetes mellitus and risk of falls in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2016 ◽  
Vol 45 (6) ◽  
pp. 761-767 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu Yang ◽  
Xinhua Hu ◽  
Qiang Zhang ◽  
Rui Zou
Physiotherapy ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rubén Fernández-Rodríguez ◽  
Celia Álvarez-Bueno ◽  
Asunción Ferri-Morales ◽  
Ana Torres-Costoso ◽  
Diana P. Pozuelo-Carrascosa ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
pp. 101238
Author(s):  
Yoshiro Okubo ◽  
Daniel Schoene ◽  
Maria JD Caetano ◽  
Erika M Pliner ◽  
Yosuke Osuka ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 15 (10) ◽  
pp. 933-938 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olivier Beauchet ◽  
B. Fantino ◽  
G. Allali ◽  
S. W. Muir ◽  
M. Montero-Odasso ◽  
...  

2004 ◽  
Vol 52 (7) ◽  
pp. 1121-1129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julie D. Moreland ◽  
Julie A. Richardson ◽  
Charlie H. Goldsmith ◽  
Catherine M. Clase

BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. e013661 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhi-Guan Huang ◽  
Yun-Hui Feng ◽  
Yu-He Li ◽  
Chang-Sheng Lv

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (14) ◽  
pp. 3184
Author(s):  
João Gustavo Claudino ◽  
José Afonso ◽  
Javad Sarvestan ◽  
Marcel Bahia Lanza ◽  
Juliana Pennone ◽  
...  

We performed a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the effects of strength training (ST), as compared to alternative multimodal or unimodal exercise programs, on the number of falls in older adults (≥60 years). Ten databases were consulted (CINAHL, Cochrane Library, EBSCO, EMBASE, PEDro, PubMed, Scielo, Scopus, SPORTDiscus and Web of Science), without limitations on language or publication date. Eligibility criteria were as follows: RCTs with humans ≥60 years of age of any gender with one group performing supervised ST and a group performing another type of exercise training, reporting data pertaining falls. Certainty of evidence was assessed with Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Meta-analysis used a random effects model to calculate the risk ratio (RR) for number of falls. Five RCTs with six trials were included (n = 543, 76% women). There was no difference between ST and alternative exercise interventions for falls (RR = 1.00, 95% CI 0.77–1.30, p = 0.99). The certainty of evidence was very low. No dose–response relationship could be established. In sum, ST showed comparable RR based on number of falls in older adults when compared to other multimodal or unimodal exercise modalities, but evidence is scarce and heterogeneous, and additional research is required for more robust conclusions. Registration: PROSPERO CRD42020222908.


Biology ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 74
Author(s):  
Pablo Valdés-Badilla ◽  
Rodrigo Ramirez-Campillo ◽  
Tomás Herrera-Valenzuela ◽  
Braulio Henrique Magnani Branco ◽  
Eduardo Guzmán-Muñoz ◽  
...  

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the available body of published peer-reviewed articles related to the effects of Olympic combat sports (OCS), compared with active/passive controls, on balance, fall risk, or falls in older adults. The TESTEX and GRADE scales assessed the methodological quality and certainty of the evidence. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (code: CRD42020204034). From 1496 records, eight studies were included, involving 322 older adults (64% female; mean age = 71.1 years). The TESTEX scale revealed all studies with a score ≥ 60% (moderate-high quality). The GRADE scale indicated all studies with at least some concerns, up to a high risk of bias (i.e., was rated very low). Meta-analyses were planned, although the reduced number of studies precluded its incorporation in the final manuscript. Only two from six studies that assessed balance found improvements after OCS compared to controls. No differences were found between OCS vs. control groups for fall risk or falls. The available evidence does not allow a definitive recommendation for or against OCS interventions as an effective strategy to improve balance and reduce the fall risk or falls in older adults. Therefore, more high-quality studies are required to draw definitive conclusions.


Maturitas ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 72 (3) ◽  
pp. 206-213 ◽  
Author(s):  
Freddy M.H. Lam ◽  
Ricky W.K. Lau ◽  
Raymond C.K. Chung ◽  
Marco Y.C. Pang

2016 ◽  
Vol 51 (24) ◽  
pp. 1750-1758 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catherine Sherrington ◽  
Zoe A Michaleff ◽  
Nicola Fairhall ◽  
Serene S Paul ◽  
Anne Tiedemann ◽  
...  

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. e033602
Author(s):  
Deborah A Jehu ◽  
Jennifer C Davis ◽  
Teresa Liu-Ambrose

IntroductionOlder adults who fall recurrently (i.e., >1 fall/year) are at risk for functional decline and mortality. Key risk factors for recurrent falls in community-dwelling older adults are not well established due to methodological limitations, such as recall bias. A better understanding of the risk factors for recurrent falls will aid in refining clinical practice guidelines for secondary fall prevention strategies. The primary objective of this systematic review with meta-analysis is to examine the risk factors for recurrent falls in prospective studies among community-dwelling older adults.Methods and analysisA comprehensive search for articles indexed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CINAHL databases as well as grey literature was conducted on April 25, 2019. We will use MeSH and keyword search terms around the following topics: falls, recurrence, fall-risk, ageing and prospective studies. Prospective studies with monthly falls monitoring for 12 months, investigating risk factors for recurrent falls in older adults will be included. One author will complete the search. Two authors will remove duplicates and screen the titles and abstracts for their potential inclusion against the eligibility criteria. Two authors will screen the full texts and extract the data using a piloted extraction sheet. Included studies will be evaluated for the risk of bias with the Joanna Briggs Institute Prevalence Critical Appraisal tools. The quality of reporting will be determined with the Strengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology. The data extraction will include study characteristics as well as sociodemographic, balance and mobility, sensory and neuromuscular, psychological, medical, medication and environmental factors. The results will be presented via figures, summary tables, meta-analysis (when possible) and narrative summaries.Ethics and disseminationNo ethics approval will be required. Findings will be disseminated through publication and media.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019118888; Pre-results.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document