Evidence Hub

Comparative effectiveness of exercise interventions for preventing falls in older adults: A secondary analysis of a systematic review with network meta-analysis

K. Sibley, Sonia M. Thomas, A. Veroniki, M. Rodrigues, J. Hamid, Chantelle C. Lachance, E. Cogo, P. Khan et al.

Experimental Gerontology, 2020

30,697 participants · 49 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Systematic reviews have established that exercise reduces falls in older adults, however the most effective types of exercise are not known. This secondary analysis determined the comparative effectiveness of fall prevention exercise approaches.

METHOD

All fall prevention exercise interventions for older adults were identified from an existing search from inception until April 2017. Interventions were coded using a framework of 25 exercise types. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and appraised risk of bias. Pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis (NMA) were conducted. P-scores were used to rank exercise combinations.

RESULTS

One hundred and sixty-nine studies were included. NMA was conducted on 73 studies (30,697 participants) for the outcome of number of fallers. The exercise combination ranked with the greatest likelihood of being most effective relative to no exercise was: anticipatory control, dynamic stability, functional stability limits, reactive control and flexibility (p-score = 0.95). This exercise combination also significantly reduced number of fallers compared to 16 other combinations. No exercise combination had a significantly greater effect on reducing number of fallers more than this combination.

CONCLUSION

This analysis identified components of effective fall prevention exercise. The results can inform evidence-informed exercise recommendations and be used to design effective programs.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 30,697 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free