Log in to MyKarger to check if you already have access to this content.
Buy FullText & PDF Unlimited re-access via MyKarger Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use read more
CHF 38.00 *
EUR 35.00 *
USD 39.00 *
Buy a Karger Article Bundle (KAB) and profit from a discount!
If you would like to redeem your KAB credit, please log in.
Save over 20% compared to the individual article price. Rent via DeepDyve Unlimited fulltext viewing of this article Organize, annotate and mark up articles Printing and downloading restrictions apply Subscribe Access to all articles of the subscribed year(s) guaranteed for 5 years Unlimited re-access via Subscriber Login or MyKarger Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use read more Select* The final prices may differ from the prices shown due to specifics of VAT rules.
Article / Publication Details AbstractIntroduction There is increasing evidence that perturbation-based balance training (PBT) is highly effective in preventing falls at older age. Different PBT paradigms have been presented so far, yet a systematic comparison of PBT approaches with respect to feasibility and effectiveness is missing. Two different paradigms of PBT seem to be promising for clinical implementation: 1. Technology-supported training on a perturbation treadmill (PBTtreadmill); 2. Training of dynamic stability mechanisms in the presence of perturbations induced by unstable surfaces (PBTstability). This study aimed to compare both program's feasibility and effectiveness in fall-prone older adults. Methods In this three-armed randomized controlled trial, seventy-one older adults (74.9 ± 6.0 years) with a verified fall risk were randomly assigned into three groups: PBTtreadmill on a motorized treadmill, PBTstability using unstable conditions such as balance pads and a passive control group (CG). In both intervention groups, participants conducted a 6-weeks intervention with 3 sessions per week. Effects were assessed in fall risk (Brief-BEST), balance ability (Stepping Threshold Test, Center of Pressure, Limits of Stability), leg strength capacity, functional performance (Timed Up and Go Test, Chair-Stand), gait (preferred walking speed) and fear of falling (Short-FES-I). Results Fifty-one participants completed the study. Training adherence was 91% for PBTtreadmill and 87% for PBTstability, while no severe adverse events occurred. An ANCOVA with an intention-to-treat approach revealed statistically significant group effects in favor of PBTstability in the Brief-BEST (p=.009, η²=.131) and the Limits of Stability (p=.020, η²=.110), and in favor of PBTtreadmill in the Stepping Threshold Test (p
S. Karger AG, Basel
Article / Publication Details Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Comments (0)