Evidence Hub

Vitamin D treatment for the prevention of falls in older adults: systematic review and meta-analysis

Kalyani RR, Stein B, Valiyil R, Manno R, Maynard JW, Crews DC

Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 2010

248 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To systematically review and quantitatively synthesize the effect of vitamin D therapy on fall prevention in older adults.

DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

SETTING: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, LILACS, bibliographies of selected articles, and previous systematic reviews through February 2009 were searched for eligible studies.

PARTICIPANTS: Older adults (aged > or = 60) who participated in randomized controlled trials that both investigated the effectiveness of vitamin D therapy in the prevention of falls and used an explicit fall definition.

MEASUREMENTS: Two authors independently extracted data, including study characteristics, quality assessment, and outcomes. The I(2) statistic was used to assess heterogeneity in a random-effects model.

RESULTS: Of 1,679 potentially relevant articles, 10 met inclusion criteria. In pooled analysis, vitamin D therapy (200-1,000 IU) resulted in 14% (relative risk (RR)=0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.79-0.93; I(2)=7%) fewer falls than calcium or placebo (number needed to treat =15). The following subgroups had significantly fewer falls: community-dwelling (aged <80), adjunctive calcium supplementation, no history of fractures or falls, duration longer than 6 months, cholecalciferol, and dose of 800 IU or greater. Meta-regression demonstrated no linear association between vitamin D dose or duration and treatment effect. Post hoc analysis including seven additional studies (17 total)…

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.

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