Improving Balance in Older People: A Double-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial of Three Modes of Balance Training

2016 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 189-195 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmadreza Nematollahi ◽  
Fahimeh Kamali ◽  
Ali Ghanbari ◽  
Zahra Etminan ◽  
Sobhan Sobhani

The aim of this study was to examine and compare the effects of conventional, multisensory, and dual-task exercises on balance ability in a group of older community dwellers over a four-week period. Forty-four older people were randomly assigned to one of the three training groups. The score on the Fullerton Advanced Balance (FAB) scale, gait stability ratio, and walking speed were evaluated at baseline and after four weeks of training. All three groups showed significant (p < .001) improvement in the FAB scores following the three training programs (on average, 3 points for the conventional and multisensory groups and 3.8 points for the dual-task group). The improvements were comparable across the three intervention groups (p = .23). There were no statistically significant differences, neither within nor between groups, in the gait stability ratio and walking speed across the three training groups. In a four-week period, all the training modes were effective in improving balance of older adults, with no significant superiority of one mode of training over another.

Author(s):  
Samira Javadpour ◽  
Ehsan Sinaei ◽  
Reza Salehi ◽  
Shahla Zahednejad ◽  
Alireza Motealleh

To compare the effects of single- versus dual-task balance training on the gait smoothness and balance of community-dwelling older adults, 69 volunteers were randomized to single-, dual-task training, and control (no intervention) groups. Exercises were received in 18 sessions through 6 weeks. The gait smoothness was measured by the harmonic ratio of trunk accelerations using a triaxial accelerometer. Balance performance was assessed through the Fullerton Advanced Balance scale, Timed Up and Go test, Activities-specific Balance Confidence, and gait speed. After the trial, all variables improved significantly in the training groups. Moreover, differences in the mean change of all variables, except the Timed Up and Go test, were statistically significant between the interventional groups and the control group, but no significant difference was reported between the two training groups. This study suggests that balance training can improve gait smoothness as well as balance status in healthy older adults.


2016 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 234-241 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saeideh Monjezi ◽  
Hossein Negahban ◽  
Shirin Tajali ◽  
Nava Yadollahpour ◽  
Nastaran Majdinasab

Objective: To investigate the effects of dual-task balance training on postural performance in patients with multiple sclerosis as compared with single-task balance training. Design: Double-blind, pretest-posttest, randomized controlled pilot trial. Setting: Local Multiple Sclerosis Society. Subjects: A total of 47 patients were randomly assigned to two equal groups labeled as single-task training and dual-task training groups. Interventions: All patients received supervised balance training sessions, 3 times per week for 4 weeks. The patients in the single-task group performed balance activities, alone. However, patients in dual-task group practiced balance activities while simultaneously performing cognitive tasks. Main measures: The 10-Meter Walk Test and Timed Up-and-Go under single-task and dual-task conditions, in addition to Activities-specific Balance Confidence, Berg Balance Scale, and Functional Gait Assessment were assessed pre-, and post intervention and also 6-weeks after the end of intervention. Results: Only 38 patients completed the treatment plan. There was no difference in the amount of improvement seen between the two study groups. In both groups there was a significant effect of time for dual-10 Meter Walk Test (F1, 36=11.33, p=0.002) and dual-Timed Up-and-Go (F1, 36=14.27, p=0.001) but not for their single-tasks. Moreover, there was a significant effect of time for Activities-specific Balance Confidence, Berg Balance Scale, and Functional Gait Assessment ( P<0.01). Conclusions: This pilot study did not show more benefits from undertaking dual-task training than single-task training. A power analysis showed 71 patients per group would be needed to determine whether there was a clinically relevant difference for dual-task gait speed between the groups.


2019 ◽  
Vol 99 (8) ◽  
pp. 989-997 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kimberley S van Schooten ◽  
Ellen Freiberger ◽  
Myriam Sillevis Smitt ◽  
Veronika Keppner ◽  
Cornel Sieber ◽  
...  

AbstractBackgroundHigher levels of concern about falling in older people have been associated with slower walking speed and an increased risk of falls. However, it is unclear whether this relationship is independent or confounded by other fall risk factors, such as physical and cognitive function.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to examine the effects of concern about falling on gait speed, adjusted for physiological fall risk and cognitive function.DesignThis was an observational, cross-sectional study.MethodsA total of 204 community-dwelling older people aged 70 years or older were recruited from 2 sites (Germany, n = 94; Australia, n = 110). Walking speed was measured over 6 m under 4 conditions: preferred speed, fast speed, speed while carrying a tray (functional dual task), and speed while answering a question (cognitive dual task). The Falls Efficacy Scale–International was used to assess concern about falling, the Physiological Profile Assessment was used to assess physiological fall risk, and the Digit Symbol Substitution Test and Trail Making Test were used to assess attention and executive function.ResultsHigher levels of concern about falling were associated with slower gait speed. Following adjustment for age, history of falls, and female sex, and further adjustment for physical and cognitive function, the association between concern about falling and walking speed remained significant, with a considerable effect size (standardized β = 0.18 ± 0.08; P = .037).LimitationsThe use of walking speed as a sole measure of gait was a limitation of this study.ConclusionsGait speed, especially under dual-task conditions, was affected by concern about falling. Concern about falling was the strongest predictor of gait speed under all 4 conditions and should be included in routine geriatric assessments.


Author(s):  
Kyung-Min Kim ◽  
María D. Estudillo-Martínez ◽  
Yolanda Castellote-Caballero ◽  
Alejandro Estepa-Gallego ◽  
David Cruz-Díaz

Chronic Ankle Instability (CAI) is one of the most common musculoskeletal dysfunctions. Stroboscopic vision (SV) training has been deemed to enhance somatosensorial pathways in this population group; nevertheless, until recently no studies have addressed the additional effects of this treatment option to the traditional therapeutic approach. Methods: To evaluate the effectiveness of a partial visual deprivation training protocol in patients with CAI, a randomized controlled trial was carried out. Patients with CAI (n = 73) were randomized into either a balance training, SV training, or a control (no training) group. For participants assigned into training groups, they received 18 training sessions over 6 weeks. The primary outcome was dynamic balance as measured by the Star Excursion Balance Test assessed at baseline and after 6 weeks of intervention. Secondary outcome measures included ankle dorsiflexion range of motion, self-reported instability feeling, and ankle functional status. Results: Better scores in stroboscopic training and balance training groups in all outcome measures were observed in comparison with the control group with moderate to large effect sizes. Stroboscopic training was more effective than neuromuscular training in self-reported instability feeling (cohen’s d = 0.71; p = 0.042) and anterior reach distance of the star excursion balance test (cohen’s d = 1.23; p = 0.001). Conclusions: Preliminary findings from the effects of SV Stroboscopic training in patients with CAI, suggest that SV may be beneficial in CAI rehabilitation.


Author(s):  
Michael Berk ◽  
Bruno Agustini ◽  
Robyn L. Woods ◽  
Mark R. Nelson ◽  
Raj C. Shah ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document