↓ Skip to main content

Effects of Balance Training on Balance Performance in Healthy Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Medicine, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
34 X users
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
263 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
958 Mendeley
Title
Effects of Balance Training on Balance Performance in Healthy Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Published in
Sports Medicine, September 2015
DOI 10.1007/s40279-015-0375-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Melanie Lesinski, Tibor Hortobágyi, Thomas Muehlbauer, Albert Gollhofer, Urs Granacher

Abstract

The effects of balance training (BT) in older adults on proxies of postural control and mobility are well documented in the literature. However, evidence-based dose-response relationships in BT modalities (i.e., training period, training frequency, training volume) have not yet been established in healthy older adults. The objectives of this systematic literature review and meta-analysis are to quantify BT intervention effects and to additionally characterize dose-response relationships of BT modalities (e.g., training period, training frequency) through the analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that could maximize improvements in balance performance in healthy community-dwelling older adults. A computerized systematic literature search was performed in the electronic databases PubMed and Web of Science from January 1985 up to January 2015 to capture all articles related to BT in healthy old community-dwelling adults. A systematic approach was used to evaluate the 345 articles identified for initial review. Only RCTs were included if they investigated BT in healthy community-dwelling adults aged ≥65 years and tested at least one behavioral balance performance outcome (e.g., center of pressure displacements during single-leg stance). In total, 23 studies met the inclusionary criteria for review. Weighted mean standardized mean differences between subjects (SMDbs) of the intervention-induced adaptations in balance performance were calculated using a random-effects model and tested for an overall intervention effect relative to passive controls. The included studies were coded for the following criteria: training modalities (i.e., training period, training frequency, training volume) and balance outcomes [static/dynamic steady-state (i.e., maintaining a steady position during standing and walking), proactive balance (i.e., anticipation of a predicted perturbation), reactive balance (i.e., compensation of an unpredicted perturbation) as well as balance test batteries (i.e., combined testing of different balance components as for example the Berg Balance Scale)]. Heterogeneity between studies was assessed using I (2) and Chi(2)-statistics. The methodological quality of each study was tested by means of the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) Scale. Weighted mean SMDbs showed that BT is an effective means to improve static steady-state (mean SMDbs = 0.51), dynamic steady-state (mean SMDbs = 0.44), proactive (mean SMDbs = 1.73), and reactive balance (mean SMDbs = 1.01) as well as the performance in balance test batteries (mean SMDbs = 1.52) in healthy older adults. Our analyses regarding dose-response relationships in BT revealed that a training period of 11-12 weeks (mean SMDbs= 1.26), a frequency of three training sessions per week (mean SMDbs= 1.20), a total number of 36-40 training sessions (mean SMDbs = 1.39), a duration of a single training session of 31-45 min (mean SMDbs = 1.19), and a total duration of 91-120 min of BT per week (mean SMDbs = 1.93) of the applied training modalities is most effective in improving overall balance performance. However, it has to be noted that effect sizes for the respective training modalities were computed independently (i.e., modality specific). Because of the small number of studies that reported detailed information on training volume (i.e., number of exercises per training session, number of sets and/or repetitions per exercise, duration of single-balance exercises) dose-response relationships were not computed for these parameters. The present findings have to be interpreted with caution because we indirectly compared dose-response relationships across studies using SMDbs and not in a single controlled study as it is difficult to separate the impact of a single training modality (e.g., training frequency) from that of the others. Moreover, the quality of the included studies was rather limited with a mean PEDro score of 5 and the heterogeneity between studies was considerable (i.e., I (2) = 76-92 %). Our detailed analyses revealed that BT is an effective means to improve proxies of static/dynamic steady-state, proactive, and reactive balance as well as performance in balance test batteries in healthy older adults. Furthermore, we were able to establish effective BT modalities to improve balance performance in healthy older adults. Thus, practitioners and therapists are advised to consult the identified dose-response relationships of this systematic literature review and meta-analysis. However, further research of high methodologic quality is needed to determine (1) dose-response relationships of BT in terms of detailed information on training volume (e.g., number of exercises per training session) and (2) a feasible and effective method to regulate training intensity in BT.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 34 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 958 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Unknown 955 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 156 16%
Student > Master 131 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 96 10%
Researcher 61 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 51 5%
Other 166 17%
Unknown 297 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 169 18%
Sports and Recreations 169 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 114 12%
Neuroscience 37 4%
Engineering 33 3%
Other 99 10%
Unknown 337 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 34. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 December 2023.
All research outputs
#1,178,196
of 25,540,105 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#998
of 2,885 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,665
of 277,111 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#17
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,540,105 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,885 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 57.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 277,111 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.