Prevention of falls in older adults who have a high risk of falls Injury, Occupational Diseases, Poisoning
Conditions
Interventions
The study was not randomised. Participants self-referred to the aquatic arm before being checked for eligibility. For the land arm, participants who had been referred by a health professional to the S
Sponsors
University of Edinburgh
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
All
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: 1. People =50 years 2. Living independently (e.g. not in care homes) 3. Physically able to take part in an exercise class 4. Being able to self-monitor and regulate the intensity of exercise 5. Having an increased risk of falling or a history of falling, poor gait/balance or feeling unsteady
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: 1. Recent injurious fall without a medical examination 2. Significant cognitive impairment 3. Already participating in an individually prescribed exercise programme 4. Having contra-indications for exercise on land or in the water (e.g. respiratory conditions requiring O2 or compromised lung volumes; skin infections; allergy to chlorine; fear of water; incontinence; severe visual or vestibular disturbances; dementia; vascular conditions affecting sensation; any of the following if uncontrolled: heart disease, blood pressure, hypertension, pain, tachycardia, other uncontrolled mental health conditions)
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Feasibility of Aqua Steps, including: 1. Recruitment: =70% of participants for the Aqua Steps group recruited within 6 months (measured as people recruited expressed as a percentage of the target of 50) 2. Retention: =50% of participants in the Aqua Steps group to remain on the programme until the end of the intervention (measured as the number of participants in the aquatic arm who complete the intervention, expressed as a percentage of the number of participants who started the intervention) 3. Adverse events: <10% of any severe adverse effects deemed to be due to the aquatic intervention (severe adverse effects tracked through weekly diaries and instructor reporting, recorded on adverse event forms, and categorised as mild, moderate and severe) 4. Some evidence of improvement on key risk factors for falls: Evidence of improvement in some of the tests and questionnaires presented as the secondary outcome measures | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| 1. Falls and fallers assessed using questionnaire (number of falls, number of fallers/non-fallers/frequent fallers, and fall rate per person year) at baseline and 6-month follow-up Measured at baseline, end of intervention and 6-month follow-up: 2. 3 m Timed up and go (functional test, time in seconds) 3. Chair rises in 30 seconds (functional test, number of rises) 4. Functional reach (functional test, distance in cm) 5. Peak isometric knee extension force (strength test, N/kg) 6. Peak isometric knee flexion force (strength test, N/kg) 7. Peak isometric grip force (strength test, N/kg) 8. Postural stability with double and single leg stance (balance test, distance and speed of centre of pressure, in cm and cm/s) 9. Falls efficacy/fear of falling questionnaire (FES-I, range is 16-64 points, greater score = more concerned) 10. Balance confidence questionnaire (Confbal, range is 10-30 points, greater score = lower confidence) 11. Quality of life questionnaire (OPQOL-13, general question: 1-5 points, total score: 13-65 points; greater score = better quality of life) 12. Health status questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L, 0-100 points for visual analogue scale (VAS, greater score = better health), -0.594 to 1.000 for index value (applicable to UK population, greater score =better health) 13. Acceptability questionnaire (adapted version of the theory-driven generic questionnaire of acceptability of healthcare interventions from the participants’ perspective; range is 1-5 points, greater score = greater acceptability) | — |
Countries
Scotland, United Kingdom
Contacts
Public ContactStelios Psycharakis
Outcome results
None listed