Dataset Information

Surface Perturbation Training to Prevent Falls in Older Adults: A Highly Pragmatic, Randomized Controlled Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Falls are the leading cause of injuries among older adults, and trips and slips are major contributors to falls.

Objective

The authors sought to compare the effectiveness of adding a component of surface perturbation training to usual gait/balance training for reducing falls and fall-related injury in high-risk older adults referred to physical therapy.

Design

This was a multi-center, pragmatic, randomized, comparative effectiveness trial.

Setting

Treatment took place within 8 outpatient physical therapy clinics.

Patients

This study included 506 patients 65+ years of age at high fall risk referred for gait/balance training.

Intervention

This trial evaluated surface perturbation treadmill training integrated into usual multimodal exercise-based balance training at the therapist's discretion versus usual multimodal exercise-based balance training alone.

Measurements

Falls and injurious falls were assessed with a prospective daily fall diary, which was reviewed via telephone interview every 3 months for 1 year.A total of 211/253 (83%) patients randomized to perturbation training and 210/253 (83%) randomized to usual treatment provided data at 3-month follow-up. At 3 months, the perturbation training group had a significantly reduced chance of fall-related injury (5.7% versus 13.3%; relative risk 0.43) but no significant reduction in the risk of any fall (28% versus 37%, relative risk 0.78) compared with usual treatment. Time to first injurious fall showed reduced hazard in the first 3 months but no significant reduction when viewed over the entire first year.

Limitations

The limitations of this trial included lack of blinding and variable application of interventions across patients based on pragmatic study design.

Conclusion

The addition of some surface perturbation training to usual physical therapy significantly reduced injurious falls up to 3 months posttreatment. Further study is warranted to determine the optimal frequency, dose, progression, and duration of surface perturbation aimed at training postural responses for this population.

SUBMITTER: Lurie JD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7498164 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundFalls are the leading cause of fatal and non-fatal injuries among older adults. Exercise programs appear to reduce fall risk, but the optimal type, frequency, and duration of exercise is unknown. External perturbations such as tripping and slipping are a major contributor to falls, and task-specific perturbation training to enhance dynamic stability has emerged as a promising approach to modifying fall risk. The purpose of this pilot study was 1) to determine the feasibility of conducting a large pragmatic randomized trial comparing a multidimensional exercise program inclusive of the surface perturbation treadmill training (SPTT) to multidimensional exercise alone (Standard PT); and 2) to assess fall outcomes between the two groups to determine whether an effect size large enough to warrant further study might be present.MethodsA randomized pilot study at two outpatient physical therapy clinics. Participants were over age 64 and referred for gait and balance training. Feasibility for a larger randomized trial was assessed based on the ability of therapists to incorporate the SPTT into their clinical practice and acceptance of study participation by eligible patients. Falls were assessed by telephone interview 3 months after enrollment.ResultsOf 83 patients who were screened, 73 met inclusion criteria. SPTT was successfully adapted into clinical practice and 88% of eligible subjects were willing to be randomized, although 10% of the SPTT cohort dropped out prior to treatment. The SPTT group showed fewer subjects having any fall (19.23% vs. 33.33% Standard PT; p < 0.227) and fewer having an injurious fall (7.69% vs. 18.18%; p < 0.243). These results were not statistically significant but this pilot study was not powered for hypothesis testing.ConclusionsPhysical therapy inclusive of surface perturbation treadmill training appears clinically feasible, and randomization between these two PT interventions is acceptable to the majority of patients. These results appear to merit longer-term study in an adequately powered trial.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov: NCT01006967.

Project description:BackgroundFalls are the leading cause of injuries among older adults. Perturbation-based balance training (PBT) is an innovative approach to fall prevention that aims to improve the reactive balance response following perturbations such as slipping and tripping. Many of these PBT studies have targeted reactive balance after slipping or tripping, despite both contributing to a large proportion of older adult falls. The goal of this randomized controlled trial was to evaluate the effects of PBT targeting slipping and tripping on laboratory-induced slips and trips. To build upon prior work, the present study included: 1) a control group; 2) separate training and assessment sessions; 3) PBT methods potentially more amenable for use outside the lab compared to methods employed elsewhere, and 4) individualized training for older adult participants.MethodsThirty-four community-dwelling, healthy older adults (61-75 years) were assigned to PBT or a control intervention using minimization. Using a parallel design, reactive balance (primary outcome) and fall incidence were assessed before and after four sessions of BRT or a control intervention involving general balance exercises. Assessments involved exposing participants to an unexpected laboratory-induced slip or trip. Reactive balance and fall incidence were compared between three mutually-exclusive groups: 1) baseline participants who experienced a slip (or trip) before either intervention, 2) post-control participants who experienced a slip (or trip) after the control intervention, and 3) post-PBT participants who experienced a slip (or trip) after PBT. Neither the participants nor investigators were blinded to group assignment.ResultsAll 34 participants completed all four sessions of their assigned intervention, and all 34 participants were analyzed. Regarding slips, several measures of reactive balance were improved among post-PBT participants when compared to baseline participants or post-control participants, and fall incidence among post-PBT participants (18%) was lower than among baseline participants (80%). Regarding trips, neither reactive balance nor fall incidence differed between groups.ConclusionsPBT targeting slipping and tripping improved reactive balance and fall incidence after laboratory-induced slips. Improvements were not observed after laboratory-induced trips. The disparity in efficacy between slips and trip may have resulted from differences in dosage and specificity between slip and trip training.Trial registrationName of Clinical Trial Registry: clinicaltrials.gov Trial Registration number: NCT04308239. Date of Registration: March 13, 2020 (retrospectively registered).

Project description:OBJECTIVES:No intervention has been shown to prevent falls poststroke. We aimed to determine if perturbation-based balance training (PBT) can reduce falls in daily life among individuals with chronic stroke. DESIGN:Assessor-blinded randomised controlled trial. SETTING:Two academic hospitals in an urban area. INTERVENTIONS:Participants were allocated using stratified blocked randomisation to either 'traditional' balance training (control) or PBT. PBT focused on improving responses to instability, whereas traditional balance training focused on maintaining stability during functional tasks. Training sessions were 1 hour twice/week for 6 weeks. Participants were also invited to complete 2 'booster' training sessions during the follow-up. PARTICIPANTS:Eighty-eight participants with chronic stroke (>6 months poststroke) were recruited and randomly allocated one of the two interventions. Five participants withdrew; 42 (control) and 41 (PBT group) were included in the analysis. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES:The primary outcome was rate of falls in the 12 months post-training. Negative binomial regression was used to compare fall rates between groups. Secondary outcomes were measures of balance, mobility, balance confidence, physical activity and social integration. RESULTS:PBT participants reported 53 falls (1.45 falls/person-year) and control participants reported 64 falls (1.72 falls/person-year; rate ratio: 0.85(0.42 to 1.69); p=0.63). Per-protocol analysis included 32 PBT and 34 control participants who completed at least 10/12 initial training sessions and 1 booster session. Within this subset, PBT participants reported 32 falls (1.07 falls/person-year) and control participants reported 57 falls (1.75 falls/person-year; rate ratio: 0.62(0.29 to 1.30); p=0.20). PBT participants had greater improvement in reactive balance control than the control group, and these improvements were sustained 12 months post-training. There were no intervention-related serious adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS:The results are inconclusive. PBT may help to prevent falls in daily life poststroke, but ongoing training may be required to maintain the benefits. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:ISRCTN05434601; Results.

Project description:BackgroundFalls are a common cause of injuries and hospitalization among older adults. While conventional balance training appears effective in preventing falls, a relatively large number of training sessions are needed and retention of the effects after the training period is hard to accomplish. This may be because these interventions are not sufficiently task-specific for the mechanism of falls. Many falls in older adults occur due to unexpected external perturbations during gait, such as trips. Therefore, there is increasing interest in perturbation-based balance training (PBT), which is a more task-specific intervention to improve reactive balance control after unexpected perturbations. The literature suggests that PBT may be more effective and require fewer training sessions to reduce falls incidence in older adults, than conventional balance training. We aim to evaluate the effect of a three-session PBT protocol on balance control, daily life falls and fear of falling. Secondly, we will evaluate the acceptability of the PBT protocol.MethodsThis is a mixed-methods study combining a single-blind (outcome assessor) randomized controlled trial (RCT) using a parallel-group design, and qualitative research evaluating the acceptability of the intervention. The study sample consists of community-dwelling older adults aged 65 years and older who have recently fallen and visited the MUMC+ outpatient clinic. Subjects are randomized into two groups. The control group (n = 40) receives usual care, meaning referral to a physical therapist. The intervention group (n = 40) receives usual care plus three 30-min sessions of PBT in the Computer Assisted Rehabilitation Environment. Subjects' balance control (Mini-BESTest) and fear of falling (FES-I) will be assessed at baseline, and 4 weeks and 3 months post-baseline. Daily life falls will be recorded with falls calendars until 6 months after the first follow-up measurement, long-term injurious falls will be recorded at 2-years' follow-up via the electronic patient record. Acceptability of the PBT protocol will be evaluated with semi-structured interviews in a subsample from the intervention group.DiscussionThis study will contribute to the evidence for the effectiveness of PBT using a training protocol based on the available literature, and also give much needed insights into the acceptability of PBT for older adults.Trial registrationNederlands Trial Register NL7680 . Registered 17-04-2019 - retrospectively registered.

Project description:IntroductionPerturbation-based balance training (PBT) is reported to effectively reduce falls in older adults and may even be superior compared with various exercise programmes. Due to the nature of the intervention, requiring unpredictable balance perturbations, the question arises whether acceptability is an issue in PBT.ObjectiveTo evaluate the acceptability of PBT in older adults with a recent history of falls.Design, method, participants and settingThis is a qualitative study in which semistructured interviews were conducted in 16 older adults (14 women and 2 men, mean age 73.6±6.0 years) who completed a three-session PBT protocol as part of another study in a university medical centre in the Netherlands. Typical case and purposive sampling strategies were applied. Interviews were based on the theoretical framework of acceptability (TFA) alongside context-specific factors and analysed using a template analysis approach.ResultsThe results indicate that this PBT protocol is perceived as acceptable by older adults with a recent history of falls and highlight key areas for potential future modifications. Enjoyment of the novel training and technology, being able to feel safe during training, and perceived impact of increased self-efficacy and balance confidence were identified as facilitating factors. Potential issues included initial apprehension or anxiety during training and perceived impact being predominantly psychological instead of physical. Complementary to the TFA one additional theme emerged which described challenges regarding the training setting, such as preference for group training in some participants and travel to the training location.ConclusionsThe results suggest that PBT is perceived acceptable by older adults with a history of falls. Increasing the social aspect of training and sharing the experiences of peers may be considered to enhance acceptability to new participants who initially feel apprehensive or anxious about their ability to participate in future implementation of PBT.Trial registration numberThe article is linked to a randomised clinical trial registered on https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/7680, NL7680; Results.

Project description:BackgroundCentral nervous system (CNS) active medications have been consistently linked to falls in older people. However, few randomized trials have evaluated whether CNS-active medication reduction reduces falls and fall-related injuries. The objective of the Reducing CNS-active Medications to Prevent Falls and Injuries in Older Adults (STOP-FALLS) trial is to test the effectiveness of a health-system-embedded deprescribing intervention focused on CNS-active medications on the incidence of medically treated falls among community-dwelling older adults.MethodsWe will conduct a pragmatic, cluster-randomized, parallel-group, controlled clinical trial within Kaiser Permanente Washington to test the effectiveness of a 12-month deprescribing intervention consisting of (1) an educational brochure and self-care handouts mailed to older adults prescribed one or more CNS-active medications (aged 60 + : opioids, benzodiazepines and Z-drugs; aged 65 + : skeletal muscle relaxants, tricyclic antidepressants, and antihistamines) and (2) decision support for their primary health care providers. Outcomes are examined over 18-26 months post-intervention. The primary outcome is first incident (post-baseline) medically treated fall as determined from health plan data. Our sample size calculations ensure at least 80% power to detect a 20% reduction in the rate of medically treated falls for participants receiving care within the intervention (n = 9) versus usual care clinics (n = 9) assuming 18 months of follow-up. Secondary outcomes include medication discontinuation or dose reduction of any target medications. Safety outcomes include serious adverse drug withdrawal events, unintentional overdose, and death. We will also examine medication signetur fields for attempts to decrease medications. We will report factors affecting implementation of the intervention.DiscussionThe STOP-FALLS trial will provide new information about whether a health-system-embedded deprescribing intervention that targets older participants and their primary care providers reduces medically treated falls and CNS-active medication use. Insights into factors affecting implementation will inform future research and healthcare organizations that may be interested in replicating the intervention.Trial registrationClinicalTrial.gov NCT05689554. Registered on 18 January 2023, retrospectively registered.