↓ Skip to main content

Pilot comparative effectiveness study of surface perturbation treadmill training to prevent falls in older adults

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Geriatrics, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
56 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
199 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Pilot comparative effectiveness study of surface perturbation treadmill training to prevent falls in older adults
Published in
BMC Geriatrics, May 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2318-13-49
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jon D Lurie, Alexandra B Zagaria, Dawna M Pidgeon, Judith L Forman, Kevin F Spratt

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Falls 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. METHODS: A 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. RESULTS: Of 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. CONCLUSIONS: Physical 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 registration: clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01006967.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 199 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 195 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 36 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 15%
Student > Bachelor 25 13%
Researcher 16 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 6%
Other 26 13%
Unknown 55 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 32 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 31 16%
Engineering 21 11%
Sports and Recreations 18 9%
Neuroscience 10 5%
Other 20 10%
Unknown 67 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 15 January 2020.
All research outputs
#6,258,910
of 22,710,079 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#1,538
of 3,145 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,062
of 195,184 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#10
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,710,079 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,145 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 195,184 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 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 62% of its contemporaries.