Skip to content

Balance Recovery Training for Fall Prevention in Retirement Communities

Balance Recovery Training for Fall Prevention in Retirement Communities

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02551666
Enrollment
35
Registered
2015-09-16
Start date
2015-09-30
Completion date
2017-05-31
Last updated
2020-07-14

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Accidental Falls, Aged, Exercise Movement Techniques

Brief summary

Falls are the leading cause of injuries and injury-related deaths among older adults over the age of 65 in the United States. To help reduce the number of these falls, there is growing interest in using reactive balance training to improve the reactive response to common perturbations (e.g., tripping and slipping). The goal of this study was to compare treadmill-based reactive balance training versus Tai Chi performed at, and among residents of, older adult senior housing. We hypothesized that participants randomized to reactive balance training (RBT) would show better performance on reactive balance tests compared to participants randomized to Tai Chi. We also hypothesized that participants randomized to Tai Chi would show better performance on clinical tests of balance and mobility compared to participants randomized to RBT. The long-term goal of this work is to demonstrate the value of RBT over Tai Chi for preventing falls resulting from sudden, external perturbations. Thirty-five residents of five senior housing facilities were allocated to either treadmill-based reactive balance training or Tai Chi training. Both interventions were performed three times per week for four weeks, with each session lasting approximately 30 minutes. A battery of balance tests was performed at baseline, and again one week, one month, three months, and six months post-training. The battery included six standard clinical tests of balance and mobility, and a test of reactive balance performance.

Interventions

OTHERBalance recovery training

Participants will practice recovering their balance after a perturbation similar to tripping while walking. Each of these 'balance recovery training' sessions will last approximately 30 minutes, and will be performed 3 times per week for 4 weeks.

Participants will perform Tai Chi exercises (Yang short form) for 30 minutes, 3 times a week for 4 weeks. Each session will be led by an experienced Tai Chi instructor.

Sponsors

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
CollaboratorOTHER
University of Michigan
CollaboratorOTHER
Texas A&M University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
70 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* Must be age 70 or older * Must be a resident of local continuing care retirement community (CCRC) * Must be able to walk down a long hallway without any aids (cane, walker, etc.) * Must not have a fragility fracture in the past 10 years * Must not smoke * Must not be in physical therapy * Must not perform more than 150 minutes/week of moderate to vigorous aerobic activity * Must score 24 or higher on Folstein Mini Mental Status Exam * Must have less than 20% probability of major osteoporotic fracture as assessed by the fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX) score * Must not have recently (within 1 year) participated in Tai Chi

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Maximum Torso Angle at 0.8 Mph1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after completing four weeks of exercise interventionmaximum torso angle during a simulated trip, and be measures in degrees. Larger angles indicate worse performance.
Maximum Torso Angle at 1.6 Mph1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after completing four weeks of exercise interventionmaximum torso angle during a simulated trip, and be measures in degrees. Larger angles indicate worse performance.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Timed-up-and-go Test1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after completing four weeks of exercise interventionThe timed-up-and-go tests is measured in seconds. Longer times indicate worse performance.
Unipedal Stance Time Test1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after completing four weeks of exercise interventionThe unipedal stance time is measured in seconds, up to a maximum of 30 seconds. Longer times indicate better performance.
Maximum Step Length Test1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after completing four weeks of exercise interventionMaximum step length is measured in inches. Longer maximum step length indicates better performance.
Reactive Balance Rating1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after completing four weeks of exercise interventionThe reactive balance rating evaluates performance in response to six separate tests on a treadmill involving sudden acceleration of the belt to elicit a loss of balance from stance. The administrator scores as 0, 1, or 2: a) the overall effectiveness of the initial stepping response to each treadmill acceleration, and b) the amount of support provided by the harness or spotter next to the participant. These scores are then combined using a rubric to determine the overall reactive balance rating. The reactive balance rating is a score on a scale from 0 to 12 where higher scores indicates a better outcome. More details are available at: Madigan ML, Aviles J, Allin LJ, Nussbaum MA, Alexander NB. A Reactive Balance Rating Method That Correlates With Kinematics After Trip-like Perturbations on a Treadmill and Fall Risk Among Residents of Older Adult Congregate Housing. The Journals of Gerontology: Series A. 2018: 73(9): 1222-1228.
Performance-oriented Mobility Assessment (POMA)1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after completing four weeks of exercise interventionThe Performance-oriented Mobility Assessment is a common clinical test for assessing a person's static and dynamic balance abilities. The test is in two short sections that contain one examining static balance, and the other gait. The section examining static balance includes 9 individual tests scored 0, 1, or 2 by the test administrator based upon their observation of the balance performance (higher is better). The section on gait includes 7 individual tests scored 0, 1, or 2 by the test administrator based upon their observation of the gait performance (higher is better). All of these individual test scores are then summed to determine the overall Performance-oriented Mobility Assessment score. The overall Performance-oriented Mobility Assessment score is on a scale from 0 to 28. Larger values indicate better mobility. Additional details are published here: Tinetti ME. Performance-oriented assessment of mobility problems in elderly patients. JAGS 1986; 34: 119-126.
Berg Balance Test1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after completing four weeks of exercise interventionThe Berg balance test is measures that evaluates static balance and fall risk using 14 individual sub-tests. It includes static and dynamic activities of varying complexity. The test administrator scores performance on each sub-test as either a 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4. All scores are sub-tests are then summed to determine the overall Berg balance test score. The Berg balance test score is on a scale from 0 to 56. Larger values indicate better balance. More information is available at: Berg, K., Wood-Dauphine, S.L. and Williams, J.L. Measuring balance in the elderly: validation of an instrument. Can. J. Public Health, 83(S2): S7-S11, 1992.
Step Length at 1.6 Mph1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after completing four weeks of exercise interventionstep length during reactive balance trial.
Activities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after completing four weeks of exercise interventionActivities-specific balance confidence scale ranges from 0 to 100. Larger values indicate more confidence (i.e. better outcome).
Step Length at 0.8 Mph1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after completing four weeks of exercise interventionstep length during reactive balance trial.

Participant flow

Pre-assignment details

151 prospective subjects were assessed for eligibility. 74 failed the medical screening 28 ended up declining to participate after learning more about the study 14 were withdrawn for other reasons not related to the study 35 participants remained and were allocated to one of the two treatment groups.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Tai Chi Exercise Intervention
Participants will perform 30-minute Tai Chi sessions (Yang Short form) 3 times a week for 4 weeks. Tai Chi exercise: Participants will perform Tai Chi exercises (Yang short form) for 30 minutes, 3 times a week for 4 weeks. Each session will be led by an experienced Tai Chi instructor.
16
Balance Recovery Training
Participants will practice balance recovery on a modified treadmill for approximately 30-minutes per session, 3 sessions a week for 4 weeks. Balance recovery training: Participants will practice recovering their balance after a perturbation similar to tripping while walking. Each of these 'balance recovery training' sessions will last approximately 30 minutes, and will be performed 3 times per week for 4 weeks.
19
Total35

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001
Overall StudyWithdrawal by Subject13

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicBalance Recovery TrainingTotalTai Chi Exercise Intervention
Age, Continuous80.9 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.2
81.7 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 5.4
82.6 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.5
Body mass index (kg/m^2)28.6 kg/(m^2)
STANDARD_DEVIATION 5.3
29.6 kg/(m^2)
STANDARD_DEVIATION 5
30.8 kg/(m^2)
STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.5
Number of participants reporting 2 or more falls in the past year2 participants7 participants5 participants
Number of participants reporting falls with injury in the past year1 participants6 participants5 participants
Race and Ethnicity Not Collected0 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
19 participants35 participants16 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
13 Participants24 Participants11 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
6 Participants11 Participants5 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 160 / 19
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 160 / 19
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 160 / 19

Outcome results

Primary

Maximum Torso Angle at 0.8 Mph

maximum torso angle during a simulated trip, and be measures in degrees. Larger angles indicate worse performance.

Time frame: 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after completing four weeks of exercise intervention

Population: participants who completed at least 9 of 12 sessions

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Tai Chi ExerciseMaximum Torso Angle at 0.8 Mph1 week post intervention20.5 degreesStandard Deviation 8.8
Tai Chi ExerciseMaximum Torso Angle at 0.8 Mph3 months post intervention16.8 degreesStandard Deviation 3.6
Tai Chi ExerciseMaximum Torso Angle at 0.8 Mph1 month post intervention17.5 degreesStandard Deviation 7.1
Tai Chi ExerciseMaximum Torso Angle at 0.8 Mph6 months post intervention18.2 degreesStandard Deviation 7.5
Tai Chi ExerciseMaximum Torso Angle at 0.8 MphBaseline18.8 degreesStandard Deviation 9
Balance Recovery TrainingMaximum Torso Angle at 0.8 Mph6 months post intervention16.2 degreesStandard Deviation 10.5
Balance Recovery TrainingMaximum Torso Angle at 0.8 MphBaseline23.9 degreesStandard Deviation 10.6
Balance Recovery TrainingMaximum Torso Angle at 0.8 Mph1 week post intervention11.7 degreesStandard Deviation 4.4
Balance Recovery TrainingMaximum Torso Angle at 0.8 Mph1 month post intervention13.1 degreesStandard Deviation 5.7
Balance Recovery TrainingMaximum Torso Angle at 0.8 Mph3 months post intervention13.0 degreesStandard Deviation 4.1
Primary

Maximum Torso Angle at 1.6 Mph

maximum torso angle during a simulated trip, and be measures in degrees. Larger angles indicate worse performance.

Time frame: 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after completing four weeks of exercise intervention

Population: participants who completed at least 9 of 12 sessions

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Tai Chi ExerciseMaximum Torso Angle at 1.6 MphBaseline29.7 degreesStandard Deviation 14.1
Tai Chi ExerciseMaximum Torso Angle at 1.6 Mph1 week post intervention29.6 degreesStandard Deviation 12
Tai Chi ExerciseMaximum Torso Angle at 1.6 Mph1 month post intervention22.2 degreesStandard Deviation 6.2
Tai Chi ExerciseMaximum Torso Angle at 1.6 Mph3 months post intervention28.8 degreesStandard Deviation 7.8
Tai Chi ExerciseMaximum Torso Angle at 1.6 Mph6 months post intervention27.1 degreesStandard Deviation 12.5
Balance Recovery TrainingMaximum Torso Angle at 1.6 Mph1 month post intervention23.0 degreesStandard Deviation 12.3
Balance Recovery TrainingMaximum Torso Angle at 1.6 MphBaseline28.4 degreesStandard Deviation 10.4
Balance Recovery TrainingMaximum Torso Angle at 1.6 Mph6 months post intervention24.2 degreesStandard Deviation 9.8
Balance Recovery TrainingMaximum Torso Angle at 1.6 Mph1 week post intervention21.7 degreesStandard Deviation 10.8
Balance Recovery TrainingMaximum Torso Angle at 1.6 Mph3 months post intervention26.9 degreesStandard Deviation 16.5
Secondary

Activities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale

Activities-specific balance confidence scale ranges from 0 to 100. Larger values indicate more confidence (i.e. better outcome).

Time frame: 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after completing four weeks of exercise intervention

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Tai Chi ExerciseActivities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale1-week post intervention79.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 15.4
Tai Chi ExerciseActivities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale3-months post intervention76.9 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 13.9
Tai Chi ExerciseActivities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale1-month post intervention78.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 13.8
Tai Chi ExerciseActivities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale6-months post intervention76.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 17.9
Tai Chi ExerciseActivities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) ScaleBaseline76.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.3
Balance Recovery TrainingActivities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale6-months post intervention76.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 12
Balance Recovery TrainingActivities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) ScaleBaseline74.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 14.1
Balance Recovery TrainingActivities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale1-week post intervention76.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 13.8
Balance Recovery TrainingActivities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale1-month post intervention78.9 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 12
Balance Recovery TrainingActivities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale3-months post intervention75.7 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 12.9
Secondary

Berg Balance Test

The Berg balance test is measures that evaluates static balance and fall risk using 14 individual sub-tests. It includes static and dynamic activities of varying complexity. The test administrator scores performance on each sub-test as either a 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4. All scores are sub-tests are then summed to determine the overall Berg balance test score. The Berg balance test score is on a scale from 0 to 56. Larger values indicate better balance. More information is available at: Berg, K., Wood-Dauphine, S.L. and Williams, J.L. Measuring balance in the elderly: validation of an instrument. Can. J. Public Health, 83(S2): S7-S11, 1992.

Time frame: 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after completing four weeks of exercise intervention

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Tai Chi ExerciseBerg Balance Test1-week post intervention48.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.5
Tai Chi ExerciseBerg Balance Test3-month post intervention48.7 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.5
Tai Chi ExerciseBerg Balance Test1-month post intervention47.7 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 5.3
Tai Chi ExerciseBerg Balance Test6-month post intervention47.7 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 5.6
Tai Chi ExerciseBerg Balance TestBaseline44.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 5.6
Balance Recovery TrainingBerg Balance Test6-month post intervention49.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.5
Balance Recovery TrainingBerg Balance TestBaseline47.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.3
Balance Recovery TrainingBerg Balance Test1-week post intervention48.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.7
Balance Recovery TrainingBerg Balance Test1-month post intervention49.7 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 3
Balance Recovery TrainingBerg Balance Test3-month post intervention49.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.8
Secondary

Maximum Step Length Test

Maximum step length is measured in inches. Longer maximum step length indicates better performance.

Time frame: 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after completing four weeks of exercise intervention

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Tai Chi ExerciseMaximum Step Length Test1-week post intervention18.9 inchesStandard Deviation 3.6
Tai Chi ExerciseMaximum Step Length Test3-month post intervention20.7 inchesStandard Deviation 4.3
Tai Chi ExerciseMaximum Step Length Test1-month post intervention18.9 inchesStandard Deviation 5.7
Tai Chi ExerciseMaximum Step Length Test6-month post intervention20.8 inchesStandard Deviation 5
Tai Chi ExerciseMaximum Step Length TestBaseline18.1 inchesStandard Deviation 5.2
Balance Recovery TrainingMaximum Step Length Test6-month post intervention20.7 inchesStandard Deviation 3.6
Balance Recovery TrainingMaximum Step Length TestBaseline20.5 inchesStandard Deviation 5.7
Balance Recovery TrainingMaximum Step Length Test1-week post intervention21.0 inchesStandard Deviation 3.2
Balance Recovery TrainingMaximum Step Length Test1-month post intervention22.5 inchesStandard Deviation 3.7
Balance Recovery TrainingMaximum Step Length Test3-month post intervention20.4 inchesStandard Deviation 3.2
Secondary

Performance-oriented Mobility Assessment (POMA)

The Performance-oriented Mobility Assessment is a common clinical test for assessing a person's static and dynamic balance abilities. The test is in two short sections that contain one examining static balance, and the other gait. The section examining static balance includes 9 individual tests scored 0, 1, or 2 by the test administrator based upon their observation of the balance performance (higher is better). The section on gait includes 7 individual tests scored 0, 1, or 2 by the test administrator based upon their observation of the gait performance (higher is better). All of these individual test scores are then summed to determine the overall Performance-oriented Mobility Assessment score. The overall Performance-oriented Mobility Assessment score is on a scale from 0 to 28. Larger values indicate better mobility. Additional details are published here: Tinetti ME. Performance-oriented assessment of mobility problems in elderly patients. JAGS 1986; 34: 119-126.

Time frame: 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after completing four weeks of exercise intervention

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Tai Chi ExercisePerformance-oriented Mobility Assessment (POMA)1-week post intervention24.9 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.4
Tai Chi ExercisePerformance-oriented Mobility Assessment (POMA)3-month post intervention24.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.3
Tai Chi ExercisePerformance-oriented Mobility Assessment (POMA)1-month post intervention24.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.8
Tai Chi ExercisePerformance-oriented Mobility Assessment (POMA)6-month post intervention23.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.3
Tai Chi ExercisePerformance-oriented Mobility Assessment (POMA)Baseline23.4 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.9
Balance Recovery TrainingPerformance-oriented Mobility Assessment (POMA)6-month post intervention24.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.4
Balance Recovery TrainingPerformance-oriented Mobility Assessment (POMA)Baseline23.7 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.8
Balance Recovery TrainingPerformance-oriented Mobility Assessment (POMA)1-week post intervention23.9 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 2
Balance Recovery TrainingPerformance-oriented Mobility Assessment (POMA)1-month post intervention24.9 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.7
Balance Recovery TrainingPerformance-oriented Mobility Assessment (POMA)3-month post intervention24.9 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.6
Secondary

Reactive Balance Rating

The reactive balance rating evaluates performance in response to six separate tests on a treadmill involving sudden acceleration of the belt to elicit a loss of balance from stance. The administrator scores as 0, 1, or 2: a) the overall effectiveness of the initial stepping response to each treadmill acceleration, and b) the amount of support provided by the harness or spotter next to the participant. These scores are then combined using a rubric to determine the overall reactive balance rating. The reactive balance rating is a score on a scale from 0 to 12 where higher scores indicates a better outcome. More details are available at: Madigan ML, Aviles J, Allin LJ, Nussbaum MA, Alexander NB. A Reactive Balance Rating Method That Correlates With Kinematics After Trip-like Perturbations on a Treadmill and Fall Risk Among Residents of Older Adult Congregate Housing. The Journals of Gerontology: Series A. 2018: 73(9): 1222-1228.

Time frame: 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after completing four weeks of exercise intervention

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Tai Chi ExerciseReactive Balance Rating1 week after intervention6.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.4
Tai Chi ExerciseReactive Balance Rating3 months after intervention7.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.4
Tai Chi ExerciseReactive Balance Rating1 month after intervention6.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.3
Tai Chi ExerciseReactive Balance Rating6 months after intervention6.7 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.2
Tai Chi ExerciseReactive Balance RatingBaseline4.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 2
Balance Recovery TrainingReactive Balance Rating6 months after intervention8.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.6
Balance Recovery TrainingReactive Balance RatingBaseline4.8 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.5
Balance Recovery TrainingReactive Balance Rating1 week after intervention8.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.2
Balance Recovery TrainingReactive Balance Rating1 month after intervention8.7 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.2
Balance Recovery TrainingReactive Balance Rating3 months after intervention8.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.2
Secondary

Step Length at 0.8 Mph

step length during reactive balance trial.

Time frame: 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after completing four weeks of exercise intervention

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Tai Chi ExerciseStep Length at 0.8 Mph1 week post intervention.44 metersStandard Deviation 0.12
Tai Chi ExerciseStep Length at 0.8 Mph3 months post intervention.50 metersStandard Deviation 0.08
Tai Chi ExerciseStep Length at 0.8 Mph1 month post intervention.48 metersStandard Deviation 0.09
Tai Chi ExerciseStep Length at 0.8 Mph6 months post intervention.49 metersStandard Deviation 0.11
Tai Chi ExerciseStep Length at 0.8 MphBaseline.49 metersStandard Deviation 0.06
Balance Recovery TrainingStep Length at 0.8 Mph6 months post intervention.53 metersStandard Deviation 0.07
Balance Recovery TrainingStep Length at 0.8 MphBaseline.51 metersStandard Deviation 0.09
Balance Recovery TrainingStep Length at 0.8 Mph1 week post intervention.52 metersStandard Deviation 0.09
Balance Recovery TrainingStep Length at 0.8 Mph1 month post intervention.51 metersStandard Deviation 0.08
Balance Recovery TrainingStep Length at 0.8 Mph3 months post intervention.52 metersStandard Deviation 0.12
Secondary

Step Length at 1.6 Mph

step length during reactive balance trial.

Time frame: 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after completing four weeks of exercise intervention

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Tai Chi ExerciseStep Length at 1.6 Mph1 week post intervention.56 metersStandard Deviation 0.1
Tai Chi ExerciseStep Length at 1.6 Mph3 months post intervention.64 metersStandard Deviation 0.03
Tai Chi ExerciseStep Length at 1.6 Mph1 month post intervention.58 metersStandard Deviation 0.06
Tai Chi ExerciseStep Length at 1.6 Mph6 months post intervention.63 metersStandard Deviation 0.05
Tai Chi ExerciseStep Length at 1.6 MphBaseline.61 metersStandard Deviation 0.1
Balance Recovery TrainingStep Length at 1.6 Mph6 months post intervention.61 metersStandard Deviation 0.09
Balance Recovery TrainingStep Length at 1.6 MphBaseline.56 metersStandard Deviation 0.11
Balance Recovery TrainingStep Length at 1.6 Mph1 week post intervention.62 metersStandard Deviation 0.09
Balance Recovery TrainingStep Length at 1.6 Mph1 month post intervention.60 metersStandard Deviation 0.09
Balance Recovery TrainingStep Length at 1.6 Mph3 months post intervention.62 metersStandard Deviation 0.07
Secondary

Timed-up-and-go Test

The timed-up-and-go tests is measured in seconds. Longer times indicate worse performance.

Time frame: 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after completing four weeks of exercise intervention

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Tai Chi ExerciseTimed-up-and-go Test1 week post intervention13.6 secondsStandard Deviation 3.9
Tai Chi ExerciseTimed-up-and-go Test3 months post intervention11.9 secondsStandard Deviation 3.4
Tai Chi ExerciseTimed-up-and-go Test1 month post intervention13.2 secondsStandard Deviation 4.2
Tai Chi ExerciseTimed-up-and-go Test6 months post intervention13.2 secondsStandard Deviation 4.7
Tai Chi ExerciseTimed-up-and-go TestBaseline14.8 secondsStandard Deviation 6
Balance Recovery TrainingTimed-up-and-go Test6 months post intervention12.2 secondsStandard Deviation 4.3
Balance Recovery TrainingTimed-up-and-go TestBaseline12.9 secondsStandard Deviation 4.5
Balance Recovery TrainingTimed-up-and-go Test1 week post intervention12.1 secondsStandard Deviation 3.7
Balance Recovery TrainingTimed-up-and-go Test1 month post intervention11.8 secondsStandard Deviation 3.6
Balance Recovery TrainingTimed-up-and-go Test3 months post intervention11.7 secondsStandard Deviation 3.7
Secondary

Unipedal Stance Time Test

The unipedal stance time is measured in seconds, up to a maximum of 30 seconds. Longer times indicate better performance.

Time frame: 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after completing four weeks of exercise intervention

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Tai Chi ExerciseUnipedal Stance Time Test3 months post intervention4.8 secondsStandard Deviation 3.7
Tai Chi ExerciseUnipedal Stance Time Test6 month post intervention8.3 secondsStandard Deviation 8.7
Tai Chi ExerciseUnipedal Stance Time TestBaseline4.0 secondsStandard Deviation 3.2
Tai Chi ExerciseUnipedal Stance Time Test1 week post intervention6.0 secondsStandard Deviation 4.9
Tai Chi ExerciseUnipedal Stance Time Test1 month post intervention5.3 secondsStandard Deviation 4.5
Balance Recovery TrainingUnipedal Stance Time Test1 month post intervention7.6 secondsStandard Deviation 10.4
Balance Recovery TrainingUnipedal Stance Time Test3 months post intervention6.8 secondsStandard Deviation 9.8
Balance Recovery TrainingUnipedal Stance Time Test1 week post intervention6.3 secondsStandard Deviation 7.4
Balance Recovery TrainingUnipedal Stance Time Test6 month post intervention6.5 secondsStandard Deviation 9.7
Balance Recovery TrainingUnipedal Stance Time TestBaseline5.7 secondsStandard Deviation 6.4

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026