Evidence based practice and nursing research
Bimbo38
Task2Res5.pdf
R E V I E W P A P E R
The effectiveness of exercise for fall prevention in nursing home residents: A systematic review meta‐analysis
Pei-ye Cao1 | Qing-hua Zhao1 | Ming-zhao Xiao2 | Ling-na Kong3 | Ling Xiao1
1Department of Nursing, The First Affiliated
Hospital of Chongqing Medical University,
Chongqing, China
2Department of Urology, The First
Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical
University, Chongqing, China
3Nursing College of Chongqing Medical
University, Chongqing, China
Correspondence
Qing-hua Zhao, Department of Nursing, The
First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing
Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Email: [email protected]
Abstract
Aim: The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of exercise on fall
prevention in nursing home residents.
Background: Nursing home residents have a high risk of falling. No conclusive evi-
dence exists on the effectiveness of exercise on fall prevention in nursing home res-
idents.
Design: Systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials. Data resources: Databases of PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Cen-
tral Register of Controlled Trials, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Lit-
erature and China Biology Medicine were searched from inception to March 2017,
with no language limitation.
Review methods: The review was conducted according to the guidelines of the
Cochrane Collaboration. Studies on exercise interventions to prevent falls in nursing
home residents were eligible. The primary outcome was the odds ratio with 95%
confidence intervals of falls.
Results: Nine studies were included in the meta‐analysis where exercise was com- pared with daily routine, social activities, and other methods in preventing falls.
About falls, the pooled effect size of seven studies showed that exercise had no
effect on fall prevention in nursing home residents. There was low heterogeneity.
No significant publication bias was observed.
Conclusions: The results of the systematic review and meta‐analysis suggested that exercise did not play a role in preventing falls. Further studies with high quality and
larger samples are required to support or counter the results.
K E Y W O R D S
accidental falls, exercise, nursing homes, prevention, systematic review
1 | INTRODUCTION
Nursing home residents have a high risk of falling. The fall incidence
in nursing home residents is estimated to be 33.9%, which is three
times higher than older adults living in community (Hewitt, Ref-
shauge, Goodall, Henwood, & Clemson, 2014; Kaya et al., 2012).
Falls in nursing homes often lead to fractures, subdural haematoma,
and soft‐tissue injuries, causing death or disability (Blain & Bousquet,
2015; Chin, 2012). Apart from the physical consequences, falls also
have psychological burden. Residents who have fallen may have dif-
ferent levels of fear of falling. They might lose confidence in social
interactions and perceive a poor quality of life (Blain & Bousquet,
2015). Falls also have been proved to increase additional costs of
nursing home care, including the need for more rehabilitation and an
increased level of care (Heinrich, Rapp, Rissmann, Becker, & Konig,
2011).
Received: 26 September 2017 | Revised: 18 April 2018 | Accepted: 1 May 2018 DOI: 10.1111/jan.13814
J Adv Nurs. 2018;74:2511–2522. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/jan © 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd | 2511
Multiple factors result in falls, such as the external environment
and the individual's intrinsic physical and cognitive condition (Ungar et
al., 2013). Impaired balance and mobility and gait abnormalities are
considered significant factors by which interventions to prevent falls
are usually modified or aggravated (Barker, Nitz, Choy, & Haines,
2012; Giuliani et al., 2008). Among these interventions, whether exer-
cise has an effect on fall prevention is not clear (Kendrick et al., 2014).
1.1 | Background
Previous systematic reviews and meta‐analyses have demonstrated that exercise played a beneficial role in preventing falls by older adults
living in community (Petridou, Manti, Ntinapogias, Negri, & Szczerbin-
ska, 2009; Sherrington et al., 2008). Stubbs, Denkinger, Brefka, and
Dallmeier (2015) conducted a comprehensive umbrella review of sys-
tematic reviews including meta‐analyses of RCTs and found the effec- tiveness of exercise on reducing falls was not clear in long‐term care facilities, but did not remind some possible reasons of the unclear con-
clusion. Some reasons may explain why evidence on the effectiveness
of exercise on fall prevention was not adequate. On the one hand,
some studies only reviewed multifactorial interventions, such as per-
sonal educational consultation combined with environment medica-
tion and exercise programme combined with medication review
(Cusimano, Kwok, & Spadafora, 2008; Quigley et al., 2010). On the
other hand, the more important reason was that previous reviews
included studies with heterogeneous groups of residents from differ-
ent care settings that were defined by different terminology such as
institutionalized, care facilities, care homes, residential facilities, and
long‐term care facilities (Cameron et al., 2012; Guo, Tsai, Liao, Tu, & Huang, 2014; Oliver et al., 2007; Sherrington, Tiedemann, Fairhall,
Close, & Lord, 2011). Guo et al. (2014) defined institutionalized as
medical centres, hospitals, nursing homes, and care centres. Sherring-
ton et al. (2011) took no account of the difference of settings and
included 54 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in commu-
nity and residential care settings. These settings may have significant
differences in care intensity and content. A Cochrane review concen-
trating on falls in care facilities conducted subgroup analysis according
to levels of care in care facilities and further found that the effective-
ness of exercise remained uncertain due to conflicting results, possibly
associated with differences in levels of care provided (Cameron et al.,
2012). Furthermore, a recent systematic review and meta‐analysis showed fall prevention interventions significantly reduced the number
of recurrent fallers by 21% (Vlaeyen et al., 2015). In this review, nurs-
ing homes clearly defined as a residential facility that provides per-
sonal care and limited clinical care for persons, but the effectiveness
of exercise intervention has not been noticed.
Consequently, the current systematic review and meta‐analysis aimed to determine the effectiveness of exercise on fall prevention for
adults who permanently reside in nursing homes. In our study, nursing
homes are different from long‐term care facilities only providing per- sonal care and defined as “high level care facilities that are primarily engaged in providing inpatient nursing and rehabilitative services for
long‐term care patients. The care is generally provided for an extended
period of time to individuals requiring nursing care. These care facili-
ties have a permanent core staff of registered or licensed practical
nurses that, along with other staff, provide nursing care in combination
with personal care” (NLM 2012, OECD 2011, Sorensen et al., 2006). They excluded posthospital‐skilled care, rehabilitation, and long‐term care for young people suffering from physical and mental impairment.
2 | THE REVIEW
2.1 | Aims
The aim of this systematic review and meta‐analysis was to identify the effectiveness of exercise on fall prevention in nursing home resi-
dents and provide reference for clinical practice and future research.
2.2 | Design
The study was a systematic review and meta‐analysis of RCTs, focusing on the effectiveness of exercise on fall prevention in nurs-
ing home residents. The review was conducted according to the
guidelines of the Cochrane Collaboration (Higgins & Green, 2011)
and reported in concordance with a Preferred Reporting Items for
Why is this review needed?
• Nursing home residents have a high risk of falling, which always leads to physical and psychological decline.
• Whether exercise has an effect on fall prevention for nursing home residents remains controversial.
• Previous reviews have been conducted to identify the effect of exercise on fall prevention in older adults living
in community and other care settings, but no conclusive
evidence exists in nursing home residents.
What are the key findings?
• The current systematic review and meta-analysis sug- gested that exercise did not reduce the incidence of falls
in nursing home residents.
• The small number of included studies may result in a lack of data about some confounding factors, which may
affect the accuracy of the results.
How should the findings be used to influence
policy/practice/research/education?
• Nurses and other health providers should take other measures to prevent falls in nursing home residents
rather than simply exercise.
• Further studies are required to support or counter the result or to find whether there is an optimal and safe
level of exercise for nursing home residents.
2512 | CAO ET AL.
Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) statement (Moher, Liberati, Tetzlaff, Altman, & Group, 2009).
2.3 | Search methods
We searched the electronic databases of PubMed, Web of Science,
EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL),
Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and
China Biology Medicine (CBM) for articles related to exercise on fall
prevention in nursing home residents from database inception to March
2017, with no language limitation. We mainly used the following mesh
terms or key words when searching: (“nursing homes” OR “long term care” OR “nursing care” OR “care home” OR “nursing facility” OR “in- stitutionalization” OR “residential”) AND (“exercise” OR “training” OR “activity” OR “movement” OR “physical exercise” OR “physical train- ing” OR “physical activity”) AND (“accidental falls” OR “fall” OR “fall- ing”) AND (“prevention and control” OR “prophylaxis” OR “prevention measures” OR “prevention” OR “control” OR “prevent”). The search strategies in PubMed and Web of Science were showed in Supporting
Information Figures S1 and S2, respectively. To ensure the most com-
prehensive search, reference lists of retrieved trails and review articles
were also hand‐screened to search any other relevant studies. The inclusion criteria were as follows: (a) Design: randomized con-
trolled trials (RCTs); (b) Population: residents in nursing homes; Nurs-
ing homes were defined as “high level care facilities that are primarily engaged in providing inpatient nursing and rehabilitative services for
long‐term care patients. The care is generally provided for an extended period of time to individuals requiring nursing care. These care
facilities have a permanent core staff of registered or licensed practical
nurses that, along with other staff, provide nursing care in combination
with personal care” (NLM 2012, OECD 2011, Sorensen et al., 2006). If the setting was used other terms, such as long‐term care facility/set- ting/institute, institutionalized and residential care facility and was
accorded with the definition of nursing homes, the study was also
included; (c) intervention: exercise in the intervention group versus no
intervention or just placebo training in the control group; (d) outcome:
adequate information provided to calculate odds ratios (ORs) or stan-
dardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs)
for falls or other results related to falls. A fall was defined as “an unex- pected event where the participant comes to rest on the ground, floor,
or lower level” (Lamb, Jorstad‐Stein, Hauer, & Becker, 2005). Studies were excluded if they (a) used exercise combined other
fall preventions (such as vitamin D) in the intervention group; (b)
with no control group; (c) were duplicate articles.
2.4 | Search outcome
The initial search found 4,130 articles, among which 4,099 were
searched from databases and 31 were identified from citation in the
retrieved articles. After excluding duplicates, 2,981 articles remained.
A further 2,907 articles (180 reviews and 2,727 irrelevant articles)
were excluded based on titles and abstracts, leaving 74 articles
requested for full texts. According to the inclusion and exclusion cri-
teria, three articles were reviews, 10 articles were non‐RCT, 21 arti- cles were not conducted in nursing homes, 13 articles were not a
blank or placebo controlled, four articles did not use physical
Records identified through Additional records identified through other sources
(N = 31)
(N = 2,981)
(N = 74)
(N = 9) Studies included in the meta-analysis
Full-text articles assessed for eligibility Records excluded based on title or abstract (N = 2,907)
Review (N = 180)
Full-text articles excluded (N = 65)
Non-RCT (N = 10) Not in nursing homes (N = 21) Not a blank or placebo control (N = 13) Not using physical exercise as the only intervention (N = 4) Not relevant outcome (N = 14)
Review (N = 3)
Not relevant (N = 2,727)
Records after duplicates removed
database searching (N = 4,099)
FIGURE 1 Flow diagram for the selection of included studies
CAO ET AL. | 2513
exercise as the only intervention, and 14 articles did not report rele-
vant outcomes on falls. Thus, nine articles were included in the
meta‐analysis. The results of the search process were shown in Figure 1.
2.5 | Quality appraisal
The Cochrane collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias was used
by two independent reviewers to assess the quality of the included
studies (Higgins & Green, 2011). The quality items were the following:
random sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding of par-
ticipants and personnel, blinding of outcome assessment, incomplete
outcome data, selection of reporting, and other sources of bias (Hig-
gins & Green, 2011). Each entry was rated as “low risk,” “high risk,” or “unclear risk” (Higgins & Green, 2011). Information involved with these entries was obtained from the published reports and an attempt
was made to contact the authors if additional information was
required. Disagreement was resolved by discussion and consensus.
The results of risk of bias were summarized in Figures 2 and 3. The
interrater agreement of the quality appraisal was 0.949. Six studies
(Beaudart et al., 2013; Buckinx et al., 2014; Choi, Moon, & Song, 2005;
Kovács, Sztruhár Jónásné, Karóczi, Korpos, & Gondosraquo, 2013;
Rosendahl, Gustafson, Nordin, Lundin‐Olsson, & Nyberg, 2008; Sieva- nen, Karinkanta, Moisio‐Vilenius, & Ripsaluoma, 2014) reported ade- quate random sequence generation by computer, tossing a coin, or
drawing lots. The other three studies did not mention the method of ran-
dom sequence generation. Two studies (Kovács et al., 2013; Rosendahl
et al., 2008) described adequate allocation concealment by sealed envel-
opes. The other seven studies did not provide the information about
allocation concealment. As the blinding of participants and personnel to
the intervention in the studies were not feasible, the studies were
assessed to be adequate for blinding of participants and personnel and
blinding of outcome assessment if the outcomes were not likely to be
affected by lack of blinding. For incomplete outcome data, five studies
(Beaudart et al., 2013; Buckinx et al., 2014; Kovács et al., 2013; Rosen-
dahl et al., 2008; Sievanen et al., 2014) analysed data based on the
method of intention to treat. One study (Kato, Izumi, Hiramatsu, & Sho-
genji, 2006) reported no dropout after intervention. The remaining three
studies reported dropouts but did not analyse missing data. The report-
ing bias was assessed by whether all outcomes mentioned were ade-
quately provided. About “other sources of bias,” nine studies seemed free according to the Cochrane Collaboration's domain‐based evaluation.
2.6 | Data abstraction
Data were extracted by two independent investigators by using a
standardized form with the following variables: the first author,
publication year, country, language, type of care setting, sample
size (intervention group and control group), characteristics of partic-
ipants, characteristics of the exercise in the intervention group such
as mode, time, frequency, duration, method in the control group,
and outcome data: number of falls and some other results related
to falls.
2.7 | Synthesis
Literature data such as authors, publication year, and sample size
were input into Review Manager 5.3 software and STATA 14.0 soft-
ware for quality assessment and meta‐analysis. For dichotomous data, ORs with 95% CI were calculated. p value (two‐tailed) less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. For continuous data,
SMDs with 95% CIs were calculated. For the models of meta‐analy- sis, the random effect was used if there was a significant difference
between study heterogeneity; otherwise, the fixed effect was used.
Heterogeneity was considered significant for I2 >50% and p value of
Cochran's Q statistic <0.10 (Higgin, Thompson, Deeks, & Altman,
2003; Higgins & Thompson, 2002). If significant heterogeneity
existed, sensitivity analysis was conducted to assess the stability and
R a n d o m
s e q u e n ce
g e n e ra
tio n (
se le
ct io
n b
ia s)
A llo
ca tio
n c
o n ce
a lm
e n t (s
e le
ct io
n b
ia s)
O th
e r
b ia
s
S e le
ct iv
e r
e p o rt
in g (
re p o rt
in g b
ia s)
In co
m p le
te o
u tc
o m
e d
a ta
( a tt ri
tio n b
ia s)
B lin
d in
g o
f o u tc
o m
e a
ss e ss
m e n t (d
a te
ct io
n b
ia s)
B lin
d in
g o
f p a rt
ic ip
a n ts
a n d p
e rs
o n n e l (
p e rf
o rm
a n ce
b ia
s)
Beaudart (2013) + +
?
?
?
? ?
?
?
??
?
+
+ –
–
–
+ +
++
+ +
++
+ +
++
+
+
+ + +
++
+ + +
++++
+ + + + +
+ +
+
++++++
+
+
+
+
+
+
Bösner (2012)
Brustio (2015)
Buckinx (2014)
Choi (2005)
Kato (2006)
Kovács (2013)
Rosendahl (2008)
Sievanen (2014)
FIGU RE 2 The result of risk of bias assessment: each risk of bias item for included studies (Green means low risk of bias, yellow means unclear risk of bias, red means high risk of bias)
2514 | CAO ET AL.
reliability of results. Publication bias was assessed by using a funnel
plot and Egger's test. If the funnel plot shapes revealed obvious evi-
dence of asymmetry and the p values of Egger's tests were less than
0.05, publication bias was considered statistically significant.
3 | RESULTS
3.1 | Characteristics of the included studies
A total of nine studies (Beaudart et al., 2013; Bösner et al., 2012;
Brustio et al., 2015; Buckinx et al., 2014; Choi et al., 2005; Kato et
al., 2006; Kovács et al., 2013; Rosendahl et al., 2008; Sievanen et al.,
2014) were included in the meta‐analysis. They were all published in English between 2005 and 2015. The studies were conducted in
Belgium (N = 2) (Beaudart et al., 2013; Buckinx et al., 2014), Ger-
many (N = 1) (Bösner et al., 2012), Italy (N = 1) (Brustio et al., 2015),
Korea (N = 1) (Choi et al., 2005), Japan (N = 1) (Kato et al., 2006),
Hungary(N = 1) (Kovács et al., 2013), Sweden(N = 1) (Rosendahl et
al., 2008), and Finland(N = 1) (Sievanen et al., 2014). The types of
care setting were nursing home, long‐term care setting, institutional- ized, long‐term care facility, long‐term care institute and residential care facility. The sample size ranged from 13 to 191 participants and
included a total of 551 participants (exercise group = 280, control
group = 271). For the intervention, the intervention mode of three
studies (Beaudart et al., 2013; Buckinx et al., 2014; Sievanen et al.,
2014) was whole‐body vibration exercise (WBV), where exercises were performed on a platform that produced vertical sinusoidal
vibrations to generate a stimulation of muscle spindles and make
muscles contractions (Bogaerts, Verschueren, Delecluse, Claessens, &
Boonen, 2007). The intervention modes of the remaining studies
were weight training and balance exercises, sun‐style Tai Chi exer- cise, etc. The intervention time varied between 75 s and 80 min.
One study (Kovács et al., 2013) had no time limit. The intervention
frequency was between twice and thrice every week. The interven-
tion duration ranged from 9 weeks to 12 months. For the outcomes,
seven studies (Beaudart et al., 2013; Bösner et al., 2012; Buckinx et
al., 2014; Choi et al., 2005; Kato et al., 2006; Kovács et al., 2013;
Rosendahl et al., 2008) measured falls. Five studies (Beaudart et al.,
2013; Brustio et al., 2015; Buckinx et al., 2014; Kovács et al., 2013;
Sievanen et al., 2014) measured the Timed Up and Go test (TUG).
The TUG measured the time subjects took to rise from a sitting posi-
tion, walk 3 m, walk back, and sit down again (Podsiadlo &
Richardson, 1991). A longer time suggested a worse mobility and a
time more than 14 s indicated a high risk of falls (Shumway‐Cook, Brauer, & Woollacott, 2000). Four studies (Beaudart et al., 2013;
Bösner et al., 2012; Buckinx et al., 2014; Kovács et al., 2013) mea-
sured the POMA. The POMA scale consisted of the balance scale
(POMA‐B) and gait scale (POMA‐G) (Tinetti, 1986). The POMA‐B included seven items: sitting balance, arising from chair, immediate
standing balance (first 3–5 s), standing balance, turning balance, one leg standing balance, and sitting down. The POMA‐G included nine items: initiation of gait, step height, length, symmetry, and continuity
and path direction, trunk away, walk stance, and turning while walk-
ing. Each item was scored 2 or 3. A total score (POMA‐T) less than 19 points suggested a severe risk of falls, a score between 19 and
24 points suggested a moderate risk of falls, and a score of more
than 24 points suggested a low risk of falls. The characteristics of
the included studies were listed in Table 1.
3.2 | Effects of interventions
3.2.1 | Falls
Seven of nine studies involving 505 participants (exercise group =
253, control group = 252) provided falls outcome. There was low
heterogeneity (I2 = 48%, p = 0.073 < 0.1) and the random effects
model was used in the meta‐analysis. Compared with the control groups, exercise groups showed no statistically significant differences
in falls outcome (OR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.48–1.59, p = 0.663) (Fig- ure 4). According to the results of sensitivity analysis, the pooled
effect size was not changed by sequential omission of the individual
studies (Supporting Information Table S1). There was no publication
bias based on the funnel plot's shape (Figure 5) and Egger's test
(p = 0.419).
To explore the specific role of exercise on falls, subgroup analyses
were conducted according to the intervention mode, time, frequency,
and duration. The results of subgroup analysis were shown in Table 2.
For the intervention mode, there was no significant difference for falls
in the WBV group (OR = 1.86, 95% CI = 0.89–3.91, p = 0.100; Heterogeneity: I2 = 0%, p = 0.495 > 0.1) and in the group of other
intervention modes (OR = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.31–1.23, p = 0.170; Heterogeneity: I2 = 38.6%, p = 0.164 > 0.1). With respect to the
intervention time, both the studies with time less than 30 min (OR =
1.59, 95% CI = 0.79–3.18, p = 0.191) and time more than 30 min
Random sequence generation (selection bias)
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
Other bias
Low risk of bias Unclear risk of bias High risk of bias
0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
Selective reporting (reporting bias)
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
Allocation concealment (selection bias)
FIGURE 3 The result of risk of bias assessment: each risk of bias item shown as percentages across all included studies
CAO ET AL. | 2515
T A B L E
1 C h ar ac te ri st ic s o f in cl u d e d st u d ie s
S tu d y ID
(c o u n tr y )
C ar e se tt in g
N o . o f
p ar ti ci p an
ts M e an
ag e
M e an
M M S E
In te rv e n ti o n m o d e
In te rv e n ti o n
ti m e
In te rv e n ti o n
fr e q u e n cy
In te rv e n ti o n
d u ra ti o n
C o n tr o l g ro u p
O u tc o m e
m e as u re
B e au
d ar t e t al .
(2 0 1 3 )
(B e lg iu m )
N u rs in g h o m e
6 2 (2 6 /3 1 ;2 5 /3 1 )
8 3 .2
(8 2 .8 ;8 4 .2 )
N A
W B V
w it h 3 0 H z fr e q u e n cy
7 5 s
3 /w
e e k
3 m o n th s
D ai ly
ro u ti n e
F al l; T U G ,
T in e tt i
B ö sn e r e t al .
(2 0 1 2 )
(G e rm
an y )
N u rs in g h o m e
5 2 (2 3 /3 2 ;1 6 /2 0 )
N A
(8 5 .1 ;8 5 .5 )
N A
W e ig h t tr ai n in g an
d b al an
ce
e xe
rc is e s
4 5 m in
3 /w
e e k
6 m o n th s
V is it m o n th ly
F al l, T in e tt i
B ru st io
e t al .
(2 0 1 5 ) (I ta ly )
L o n g ‐t e rm
ca re
se tt in g
3 5 (2 0 /2 0 ;1 3 /1 5 )
8 4 .1 8 (8 5 .3 1 ;8 2 .6 9 )
N A
N e u ro m o to r tr ai n in g
6 0 m in
2 /w
e e k
4 m o n th s
D ai ly
ro u ti n e
T U G
B u ck in x e t al .
(2 0 1 4 ) (B e lg iu m )
N u rs in g h o m e
6 2 (2 3 /3 1 ;2 2 /3 1 )
8 3 .2
(8 2 .2 ;8 4 .2 )
N A (2 6 .0 ;2 3 .0 )
W B V
w it h 3 0 H z fr e q u e n cy
7 5 s
3 /w
e e k
6 m o n th s
D ai ly
ro u ti n e
F al l, T U G ,
T in e tt i
C h o i e t al .
(2 0 0 5 ) (K o re a)
In st it u ti o n al iz e d
6 8 (2 9 /N
A ;3 0 /N
A )
7 7 .8
(7 6 .9 6 ;7 8 .7 3 )
N A
S u n ‐s ty le
T ai
C h i e xe
rc is e
3 5 m in
3 /w
e e k
3 m o n th s
D ai ly
ro u ti n e
F al l
K at o e t al .
(2 0 0 6 ) (J ap
an )
L o n g ‐t e rm
ca re
fa ci lit y
3 0 (1 6 /1 6 ;1 4 /1 4 )
N A
(8 6 .3 ;8 2 .8 )
N A
A n e xe
rc is e p ro g ra m m e
co n si st in g o f a w ar m ‐u p ,
st at ic
st re tc h in g , m u sc le
st re n g th e n in g in
th e lo w e r
e xt re m it ie s, to e e xe
rc is e ,
p ro p ri o ce p ti v e
n e u ro m u sc u la r fa ci lit at io n ,
an d co
o l‐d
o w n
1 0 –1
5 m in
3 /w
e e k
3 m o n th s
D ai ly
ro u ti n e
F al l
K o v ác s e t al .
(2 0 1 3 )
(H u n g ar y )
L o n g ‐t e rm
ca re
in st it u te
8 6 (3 2 /4 3 ;3 0 /4 3 )
N A
(7 6 .3 9 ;7 9 .2 9 )
N A (2 0 .8 5 ;2 0 .9 3 )
M u lt im o d al ex er ci se
in cl u d in g
① in d iv id u al ly ta ilo re d
st re n gt h tr ai n in g ta rg et in g th e
m aj o r lo w er
lim b m u sc le s an d
p ro gr e ss iv e b al an ce
e xe rc is es ;
② w al ki n g p ro gr am
m e
N o lim
it e d
① :2 /w
e e k ;
② :1 /w
e e k
1 2 m o n th s
S o ci al
ac ti v it ie s
F al l, T U G ,
T in e tt i
R o se n d ah
l
e t al .(2
0 0 8 )
(S w e d e n )
R e si d e n ti al
ca re
fa ci lit y
1 9 1 (8 7 /9 1 ;9 6 /1 0 0 )
8 4 .7
(8 5 .3 ;8 4 .2 )
1 7 .8
(1 7 .5 ;1 8 .0 )
A h ig h ‐in
te n si ty
fu n ct io n al
e xe
rc is e p ro g ra m m e th at
in cl u d e d st at ic an
d d yn
am ic
b al an
ce e xe
rc is e s in
co m b in at io n w it h lo w e r lim
b
st re n g th
e xe
rc is e s, d yn
am ic
b al an
ce e xe
rc is e s in
w al k in g,
st at ic an
d d y n am
ic b al an
ce
e xe
rc is e s in
st an
d in g ,l o w e r
lim b st re n g th
e xe
rc is e s, an
d
w al k in g
4 5 m in
5 ti m e s
e v e ry
2 w e e k
3 m o n th s
S o ci al
ac ti v it ie s
F al ls
S ie v an
e n e t al .
(2 0 1 4 ) (F in la n d )
N u rs in g h o m e
1 5 (7 /8 ;6 /7 )
8 4 .0
(8 4 .4 ;8 3 .6 )
N A
W B V
w it h 1 2 –1
8 H z
fr e q u e n cy
8 0 m in
2 /w
e e k
1 0 w e e k s
S h am
tr ai n in g
w it h v ib ra ti o n
d e v ic e o ff
T U G
N o te : M M S E : M in i‐M
e n ta l S ta te
E xa m in at io n ; W
B V : w h o le ‐b o d y v ib ra ti o n e xe
rc is e ; T U G : T im
e d U p an
d G o te st ; T in e tt i: T in e tt i te st ; N A : n o t av ai la b le .
2516 | CAO ET AL.
(OR = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.52–1.32, p = 0.423) showed no significant difference between the exercise group and control group. There were
no heterogeneities in the two subgroups. The subgroup analyses also
showed that exercise did not reduce falls in studies with intervention
frequency less than three times a week (OR = 0.33, 95% CI = 0.03– 3.79, p = 0.370; Heterogeneity: I2 = 80.4%, p = 0.024 < 0.1), studies
with intervention frequency more than three times a week (OR =
1.09, 95% CI = 0.57–2.07, p = 0.795; Heterogeneity: (I2 = 29.6%, p = 0.224 > 0.1), studies with intervention duration less than
6 months (OR = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.56–1.34, p = 0.518; Heterogeneity: I2 = 00%, p = 0.418 > 0.1), and studies with intervention duration
more than 6 months (OR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.13–4.23, p = 0.747; Heterogeneity: I2 = 76.8%, p = 0.014 < 0.1).
3.2.2 | Tug
Five studies (Beaudart et al., 2013; Brustio et al., 2015; Buckinx et
al., 2014; Kovács et al., 2013; Sievanen et al., 2014) reported TUG,
involving 249 participants (exercise group = 131, control group =
118). The pooled effect size showed a significant difference (SMD =
−0.39, 95% CI = −0.64 to −0.13, p = 0.003; Heterogeneity:
I2 = 0%, p = 0.527) in favour of exercise, compared with the control
group (Figure 6).
3.2.3 | Poma
Four studies (Beaudart et al., 2013; Bösner et al., 2012; Buckinx et
al., 2014; Kovács et al., 2013), involving 242 participants (exercise
group = 127, control group = 115), provided the POMA outcome.
Three studies (Beaudart et al., 2013; Buckinx et al., 2014; Kovács et
al., 2013) provided the total score and two subscale scores (balance
and gait). Compared with the control group, exercise had no effect
on the total POMA score (SMD = 0.20, 95% CI = −0.05 to 0.45,
p = 0.1222; Heterogeneity: I2 = 0%, p = 0.855) and balance score
(SMD = 0.27, 95% CI = −0.27 to 0.82, p = 0.327; Heterogeneity:
I2 = 73.4%, p = 0.023), but improved the gait score (SMD = 0.36,
95% CI = 0.07–0.66, p = 0.017; Heterogeneity: I2 = 11.5%, p = 0.323) (Figure 7).
4 | DISCUSSION
4.1 | Summary of main findings
The objective of the systematic review and meta‐analysis was to assess the effectiveness of exercise on fall prevention in nursing
home residents. After a comprehensive search of literature, nine
studies were included according to the predefined inclusion criteria.
For the quality of the included studies, three of nine studies lacked
of adequately random sequence generation, most studies were lim-
ited in allocation concealment and three studies reported dropouts
but did not analyse the missing data. All studies compared exercise
with daily routine, social activities, and other methods. The exercise
intervention modes were WBV, weight training and balance exer-
cises, sun‐style Tai Chi exercise, etc. They were all developed accord- ing to the mechanism of falling. In the mechanism of falling, impaired
NOTE: Weights are from random effects analysis
Overall (I-squared = 48.0%, p = 0.073)
Choi (2005)
Kovacs (2013)
Study
Kato (2006)
Beaudart (2013)
Rosendahl (2008)
ID
Buckinx (2014)
Bosner (2012)
0.88 (0.48, 1.59)
0.45 (0.16, 1.30)
0.08 (0.01, 0.64)
0.52 (0.07, 3.70)
1.47 (0.54, 4.01)
0.92 (0.52, 1.62)
OR (95% CI)
2.48 (0.82, 7.47)
1.18 (0.33, 4.25)
100.00
16.00
6.33
%
7.24
17.00
25.04
Weight
15.40
13.00
1.00902 1 111
FIGURE 4 The forest plots of falls for included studies [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
0 0 .2
0 .4
0 .6
0 .8
1
S E
( lo
g O
R )
–1 0 1 2 3
OR
Funnel plot with pseudo 95% confidence limits
FIGURE 5 Funnel plot analysis for falls [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
CAO ET AL. | 2517
balance and mobility and gait abnormalities were the most common
fall risk factors (Gschwind et al., 2013). All exercise intervention
modes in this review were developed according to balance, mobility,
and gait training. Thus, the various exercise intervention modes have
similar mechanism of action, which was in accordance with previous
reviews (Chan et al., 2015; Silva, Eslick, & Duque, 2013).
To reduce the heterogeneity between the studies, nursing home
was clearly defined to obtain low heterogeneous participants in this
study. In addition, exercise programme without other fall preventions
was the unique intervention. Although, there was low heterogeneity
between the included studies, an attempt was also conducted to find
the source of heterogeneity by subgroup analyses according to inter-
vention mode, time, frequency, and duration. The results of sub-
group analyses showed intervention mode and time may be the
source of heterogeneity.
Three outcomes were measured: falls, TUG, and POMA. Seven
studies reported falls, five studies reported TUG, and four studies
reported POMA. For the falls, there was no statistically significant
differences between the two groups (OR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.48– 1.59, p = 0.663) and the results did not change according to sensitiv-
ity analyses. The shape of the funnel plot was symmetrical and no
publication bias was observed by Egger's test (p = 0.419). For TUG,
exercise reduced the time in the TUG tests and suggested the
improvement of mobility (SMD = −0.39, 95% CI = −0.64 to −0.13).
For POMA, the results showed no statistical difference between the
two groups in total score (SMD = 0.20, 95% CI = −0.05 to 0.45) and
balance score (SMD = 0.27, 95% CI = −0.27 to 0.82), but showed
improvement in gait score (SMD = 0.36, 95% CI = 0.07 to 0.66).
Previous systematic reviews and meta‐analyses have examined the effectiveness of fall prevention programmes, among which the
effectiveness of exercise remains controversial. The study of Hill,
Hunter, Batchelor, Cavalheri, and Burton (2015) showed that the
exercise programme did not reduce falls for older adults in the com-
munity. However, Chan et al.'s (2015) study showed that exercise
TABLE 2 Subgroup analyses of falls
Subgroup Number of studies Study
Heterogeneity OR
Q P I2 (%) OR 95%CI Z P
Intervention mode
WBV 2 Beaudart et al. (2013), Buckinx et al. (2014) 0.47 0.495 0.0% 1.86 0.89–3.91 1.65 0.100
Other 5 Bösner et al. (2012), Choi et al. (2005), Kato et al. (2006),
Kovács et al. (2013), Rosendahl et al. (2008)
6.52 0.164 38.6% 0.62 0.31–1.23 1.37 0.170
Intervention time
<30 min 3 Beaudart et al. (2013), Buckinx et al. (2014), Kato et al. (2006) 1.88 0.391 0.0% 1.59 0.79–3.18 1.31 0.191
≥30 min 3 Bösner et al. (2012), Choi et al. (2005), Rosendahl et al. (2008) 1.68 0.433 0.0% 0.83 0.52–1.32 0.80 0.423
Intervention frequency
<3/week 2 Kovács et al. (2013), Rosendahl et al. (2008) 5.10 0.024 80.4% 0.33 0.03–3.79 0.90 0.370
≥3/week 5 Beaudart et al. (2013), Bösner et al. (2012), Buckinx et al. (2014), Choi et al. (2005), Kato et al. (2006)
5.68 0.224 29.6% 1.09 0.57–2.07 0.26 0.795
Intervention duration
<6 months 4 Beaudart et al. (2013), Choi et al. (2005), Kato et al. (2006) Rosendahl et al. (2008)
2.83 0.418 0.0% 0.87 0.56–1.34 0.65 0.518
≥6 months 3 Bösner et al. (2012), Buckinx et al. (2014), Kovács et al. (2013) 8.61 0.014 76.8% 0.75 0.13–4.23 0.32 0.747
NOTE: Weights are from random effects analysis
Overall (I-squared = 0.0%, p = 0.527)
Brustio (2015)
Sievanen (2014)
Study
Buckinx (2014)
Beaudart (2013)
Kovacs (2013)
ID
–0.39 (–0.64, –0.13)
–1.00 (–1.74, –0.26)
–0.16 (–1.25, 0.93)
–0.26 (–0.76, 0.24)
–0.28 (–0.81, 0.25)
–0.37 (–0.80, 0.05)
SMD (95% CI)
100.00
11.61
5.35
%
25.52
22.43
35.09
Weight
0–1.74 1.74
FIGURE 6 The forest plots of TUG for included studies (TUG: Timed Up and Go test) [Colour figure can be viewed at wile yonlinelibrary.com]
2518 | CAO ET AL.
may have a role in falls for older adults with cognitive impairment.
Silva et al.'s (2013) study reported that exercise had a preventive
effect on falls in long‐term care facilities. The inconsistent results may be due to the heterogeneous nature of participants and the
vague terminology that defined care settings. Our study focused on
nursing homes as defined before and found that there was no statis-
tically significant differences between the exercise group and control
group in falls (OR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.48–1.59). Usually, lack of exercise was proven to be a risk factor for falls
and exercise has been regarded as a successful intervention to pre-
vent falls (Chang, Wang, Chen, & Hu, 2017; Wu et al., 2013). This
seems to be different from our findings. About the mechanism of
exercise in fall prevention, some ideas would make sense. Exercise
helped improve balance, thus protecting against falls and reacting to
falls by maintaining neuromuscular function (Shimada et al., 2009).
However, exercise may increase the risk of falls in multiple ways.
Exercise may lead to a higher level of physical activity than usual,
which implies a greater exposure to risk‐bearing situations (Graaf- mans, Lips, Wijlhuizen, Pluijm, & Bouter, 2003). Meanwhile, exercise
by frail older people may increase the level of unintended daily phys-
ical activity and a reduction in the use of walking aid due to the
improvement of fall prevention efficacy by exercise intervention
(Fiatarone et al., 1994; Kendrick et al., 2014; McMurdo & Rennie,
1993). Thus, the balance in these contrasting effects gave one possi-
ble explanation of our results that exercise did not have a positive
effect on fall prevention but improved mobility and strengthened
balance through transforming gait.
4.2 | Strengths and limitations
The strengths of this systematic review and meta‐analysis were as follows: (a) a broad search of both mesh terms and keywords was
conducted to cover exercise to prevent falls; (b) multiple databases
were searched; (c) most of the included studies had a low risk of
bias; (d) sensitivity analysis was conducted to ensure the stability
and reliability of the results; and (e) there was no publication bias in
this meta‐analysis, as the results in statistical analyses show. The main limitation of this systematic review and meta‐analysis
was the small number of included studies. It may result in a lack of
data about some confounding factors, which may affect the accuracy
of the results. Second, there were different kinds of exercise in the
meta‐analysis: WBV, weight training and balance exercises, neuro- motor training, and so on. We did not analyse the studies within
each kind of exercise separately due to the small number of included
NOTE: Weights are from random effects analysis
.
.
.
POMA-T
Beaudart (2013)
Bosner (2012)
Buckinx (2014)
Kovacs (2013)
Subtotal (I-squared = 0.0%, p = 0.855)
POMA-B
Beaudart (2013)
Buckinx (2014)
Kovács (2013)
Subtotal (I-squared = 73.4%, p = 0.023)
POMA-G
Beaudart (2013)
Buckinx (2014)
Kovács (2013)
Subtotal (I-squared = 11.5%, p = 0.323)
ID
Study
0.02 (–0.51, 0.55)
0.18 (–0.46, 0.82)
0.21 (–0.29, 0.71)
0.32 (–0.10, 0.75)
0.20 (–0.05, 0.45)
–0.17 (–0.70, 0.37)
0.17 (–0.33, 0.67)
0.77 (0.33, 1.20)
0.27 (–0.27, 0.82)
0.22 (–0.31, 0.75)
0.16 (–0.34, 0.66)
0.62 (0.19, 1.05)
0.36 (0.07, 0.66)
SMD (95% CI)
22.85
15.75
25.83
35.56
100.00
31.81
33.00
35.20
100.00
28.05
31.54
40.40
100.00
Weight
%
–1.2 0 1.2
FIGURE 7 The forest plots of POMA for included studies (POMA‐T: the total score of Performance Oriented Mobility Assessment (POMA) scale, POMA‐B: the balance scale of POMA scale; POMA‐G: the gait scale of the POMA scale) [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
CAO ET AL. | 2519
studies, which would lead to some bias for conclusion because dif-
ferent exercises may result in different size of effects. Consequently,
the results of the meta‐analysis should be generalized and inter- preted with caution.
4.3 | Implications for future research and practice
In contrast to previous reviews, we concentrated on residents in
nursing homes and got some evidence from RCTs to find that exer-
cise may not reduce falls but may improve mobility and strengthen
balance through transforming gait. However, further studies with
high quality and larger sample size are needed to support the conclu-
sion. Studies with different kinds of exercise are needed to find
whether there is an optimal and safe level of exercise for residents
in nursing homes. Furthermore, there is a need to recognize whether
potential barriers exist in the process of exercise and influence the
effect when implementing interventions. Studies are also required to
provide some advice to avoid and overcome these potential difficul-
ties. In addition, although the single exercise intervention may not
play a role in fall prevention in nursing homes, multifactorial inter-
ventions that combine exercise with other interventions may need
to be tried.
5 | CONCLUSION
Usually, exercise has been regarded as a successful intervention to
prevent falls, but when focused on residents in nursing homes, exer-
cise may not have an effect on fall prevention but only improve
mobility and strengthen balance through transforming the gait, com-
pared with daily routine, social activities, and other methods without
exercise. In consideration of some limitations described earlier, fur-
ther RCTs with high quality and larger samples are required to sup-
port or counter the results we showed.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
No conflict of interest has been declared by the authors.
AUTHORS CONTRIBUTIONS
All authors have agreed on the final version and meet at least one
of the following criteria [recommended by the ICMJE (*http://www.
icmje.org/recommendations/)]:
• substantial contributions to conception and design, acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data;
• drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content.
ORCID
Qing-hua Zhao http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3115-3128
REFERENCES
Barker, A. L., Nitz, J. C., Choy, N. L. L., & Haines, T. P. (2012). Mobility
has a non‐linear association with falls risk among people in residential aged care: An Fobservational study. Journal of Physiotherapy, 58(2),
117–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1836-9553(12)70092-9 Beaudart, C., Maquet, D., Mannarino, M., Buckinx, F., Demonceau, M.,
Crielaard, J.-M., … Bruyère, O. (2013). Effects of 3 months of short sessions of controlled whole body vibrations on the risk of falls
among nursing home residents. BMC Geriatrics, 13(1), 42. https://
doi.org/10.1186/1471-2318-13-42
Blain, H., & Bousquet, J. (2015). Living lab balance and preventing falls‐ languedoc‐roussillon. Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, 58, e58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rehab.2015.07.136
Bogaerts, A., Verschueren, S., Delecluse, C., Claessens, A. L., & Boonen,
S. (2007). Effects of whole body vibration training on postural control
in older individuals: A 1 year randomized controlled trial. Gait & Pos-
ture, 26(2), 309–316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2006.09.078 Bösner, S., Keller, H., Wöhner, A., Wöhner, C., Sönnichsen, A., Baum, E.,
& Donner-Banzhoff, N. (2012). Prevention of falls by outdoor‐walking in elderly persons at risk (“power”) – A pilot study. European Geriatric Medicine, 3(1), 28–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurger.2011.06.008
Brustio, P. R., Magistro, D., Ivaldi, S., Caglio, M. M., Rabaglietti, E., & Liu-
bicich, M. E. (2015). Neuromotor training in older women living in
long‐term care setting: A pilot study. Geriatric Nursing, 36(5), 361–366. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gerinurse.2015.05.002
Buckinx, F., Beaudart, C., Maquet, D., Demonceau, M., Crielaard, J. M.,
Reginster, J. Y., & Bruyère, O. (2014). Evaluation of the impact of 6‐ month training by whole body vibration on the risk of falls among
nursing home residents, observed over a 12‐month period: A single blind, randomized controlled trial. In Aging clinical and experimental
research, 26, 369–376. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-014-0197-z Cameron, I. D., Gillespie, L. D., Robertson, M. C., Murray, G. R., Hill, K.
D., Cumming, R. G., & Kerse, N.. (2012) Interventions for preventing
falls in older people in care facilities and hospitals. The Cochrane
Database of Systematic reviews, 12: Cd005465. https://doi.org/
10.1002/14651858.CD005465.pub3
Chan, W. C., Yeung, J. W. F., Wong, C. S. M., Lam, L. C. W., Chung, K. F.,
Luk, J. K. H., … Law, A. C. K. (2015). Efficacy of physical exercise in preventing falls in older adults with cognitive impairment: A system-
atic review and meta‐analysis. Journal of the American Medical Direc- tors Association, 16(2), 149–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda. 2014.08.007
Chang, Y. C., Wang, J. D., Chen, H. C., & Hu, S. C. (2017). Aerobic‐syner- gized exercises may improve fall‐related physical fitness in older adults. Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, 57(5), 660–669. https://doi.org/10.23736/s0022-4707.16.05728-5
Chin, W. W. (2012). Management of falls in the elderly. Proceedings of
Singapore Healthcare, 21, S15. https://doi.org/10.1177/
20101058120210S101
Choi, J. H., Moon, J. S., & Song, R. (2005). Effects of Sun‐style Tai Chi exercise on physical fitness and fall prevention in fall‐prone older adults. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 51(2), 150–157. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03480.x
Cusimano, M. D., Kwok, J., & Spadafora, K. (2008). Effectiveness of mul-
tifaceted fall‐prevention programs for the elderly in residential care. Injure Prevetion, 14(2), 113–122. https://doi.org/10.1136/ip.2007. 017533
Fiatarone, M. A., O'neill, E. F., Ryan, N. D., Clements, K. M., Solares, G. R., Nelson, M. E., … Evans, W. J. (1994). Exercise training and nutri- tional supplementation for physical frailty in very elderly people. New
England Journal of Medicine, 330(25), 1769–1775. https://doi.org/ 10.1056/NEJM199406233302501
Giuliani, C. A., Gruber-Baldini, A. L., Park, N. S., Schrodt, L. A., Rokoske,
F., Sloane, P. D., & Zimmerman, S. (2008). Physical performance
2520 | CAO ET AL.
characteristics of assisted living residents and risk for adverse health
outcomes. Gerontologist, 48(2), 203–212. https://doi.org/10.1093/ge ront/48.2.203
Graafmans, W. C., Lips, P., Wijlhuizen, G. J., Pluijm, S. M., & Bouter, L. M.
(2003). Daily physical activity and the use of a walking aid in relation
to falls in elderly people in a residential care setting. Zeitschrift fur
Gerontologie und Geriatrie, 36(1), 23–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00391-003-0143-8
Gschwind, Y. J., Kressig, R. W., Lacroix, A., Muehlbauer, T., Pfenninger,
B., & Granacher, U. (2013). A best practice fall prevention exercise
program to improve balance, strength/power and psychosocial health in older adults: Study protocol for a randomized controlled
trial. BMC Geriatr, 13, 105. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2318-13-
105
Guo, J. L., Tsai, Y. Y., Liao, J. Y., Tu, H. M., & Huang, C. M. (2014). Inter-
ventions to reduce the number of falls among older adults with/with- out cognitive impairment: An exploratory meta‐analysis. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 29(7), 661–669. https://doi.org/ 10.1002/gps.4056
Heinrich, S., Rapp, K., Rissmann, U., Becker, C., & Konig, H. H. (2011).
Service use and costs of incident femoral fractures in nursing home
residents in Germany: The Bavarian Fall and Fracture Prevention Pro-
ject (BF2P2). Journal of the American Medical Directors Association,
12(6), 459–466. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2010.11.008 Hewitt, J., Refshauge, K. M., Goodall, S., Henwood, T., & Clemson, L.
(2014). Does progressive resistance and balance exercise reduce falls
in residential aged care? Randomized Controlled Trial Protocol for
the SUNBEAM Program. Clinical interventions in aging, 9, 369.
https://doi.org/10.2147/CIA
Higgin, J., Thompson, S., Deeks, J., & Altman, D. (2003). Measuring incon-
sistency in meta‐analysis. British Medical Journal, 327(7414), 557–560. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557
Higgins, J. P. T., & Green, S. (2011) Cochrane handbook for systematic
reviews of interventions version 5.1.0. London, UK: The Cochrane Col-
laboration. (updated March 2011).
Higgins, J., & Thompson, S. G. (2002). Quantifying heterogeneity in a
meta‐analysis. Statistics in medicine, 21(11), 1539–1558. https:// doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1097-0258
Hill, K. D., Hunter, S. W., Batchelor, F. A., Cavalheri, V., & Burton, E.
(2015). Individualized home‐based exercise programs for older people to reduce falls and improve physical performance: A systematic
review and meta‐analysis. Maturitas, 82(1), 72–84. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.maturitas.2015.04.005
Kato, M., Izumi, K., Hiramatsu, T., & Shogenji, M. (2006). Development of
an exercise program for fall prevention for elderly persons in a long‐ term care facility. Japan Journal of Nursing Science, 3(2), 107–117. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-7924.2006.00057.x
Kaya, Ç. A., Kirimli, E., Kalaça, Ç., Cifcili, S., Ünalan, P. C., Kalaca, S., … ‘Sağlığı, M. Ü. T. F. H. (2012). The incidence of falls and related fac- tors in the elderly living in residential homes. Turkish Journal of Geri-
atrics‐Turk Geriatri Dergisi, 15(1), 40–46. Kendrick, D., Kumar, A., Carpenter, H., Zijlstra, G. A. R., Skelton Dawn,
A., Cook Juliette, R., … Delbaere, K.. (2014). Exercise for reducing fear of falling in older people living in the community. Cochrane Data-
base of Systematic Reviews, (11): CD009848. https://doi/org/
10.1002/14651858.CD009848.pub2
Kovács, É., Sztruhár Jónásné, I., Karóczi, C. K., Korpos, Á., & Gondos-
raquo, T. (2013). Effects of a multimodal exercise program on bal-
ance, functional mobility and fall risk in older adults with cognitive
impairment: A randomized controlled single‐blind study. European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, 49(5), 639–648.
Lamb, S. E., Jorstad-Stein, E. C., Hauer, K., & Becker, C. (2005). Preven-
tion of falls network europe and outcomes consensus group. Devel-
opment of a common outcome data set for fall injury prevention
trials: The prevention of falls network of europe consensus. Journal
of the American Geriatrics Society, 53, 1618–1622. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53455.x
McMurdo, M. E., & Rennie, L. (1993). A controlled trial of exercise by
residents of old people's homes. Age and Ageing, 22(1), 11–15. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/22.1.11
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & Group, P. (2009). Pre-
ferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta‐analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medine, 6(7), e1000097. https://doi.org/
10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
NLM. (2012). National library of medicine. Medical subject headings:
MeSH browser (2012 MeSH). Retrieved from www.nlm.nih.gov/me
sh/2012/mesh˙browser/MBrowser.html. OECD. (2011). OECD, Eurostat, WHO. Part 1, Chapter 6: ICHA-HP clas-
sification of health care providers. A system of health accounts. (pp.
133–134), 2011 ed. Paris, France: OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi. org/10.1787/9789264116016-en.
Oliver, D., Connelly, J. B., Victor, C. R., Shaw, F. E., Whitehead, A., Genc,
Y., … Gosney, M. A. (2007). Strategies to prevent falls and fractures in hospitals and care homes and effect of cognitive impairment: Sys-
tematic review and meta‐analyses. BMJ, 334(7584), 82. https:// doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39049.706493.55
Petridou, E. T., Manti, E. G., Ntinapogias, A. G., Negri, E., & Szczerbinska,
K. (2009). What works better for community‐dwelling older people at risk to fall?: A meta‐analysis of multifactorial versus physical exercise‐ alone interventions. Journal of Aging and Health, 21(5), 713–729. https://doi.org/10.1177/0898264309338298
Podsiadlo, D., & Richardson, S. (1991). The Timed “Up & Go”: A test of basic functional mobility for frail elderly persons. Journal of the Ameri-
can Geriatrics Society, 39(2), 142–148. https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.1532-5415.1991.tb01616.x
Quigley, P., Bulat, T., Kurtzman, E., Olney, R., Powell-Cope, G., & Ruben-
stein, L. (2010). Fall prevention and injury protection for nursing
home residents. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association,
11(4), 284–293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2009.09.009 Rosendahl, E., Gustafson, Y., Nordin, E., Lundin-Olsson, L., & Nyberg, L.
(2008). A randomized controlled trial of fall prevention by a high‐ intensity functional exercise program for older people living in resi-
dential care facilities. Aging Clininal and Experimental Research, 20(1),
67–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03324750 Sherrington, C., Tiedemann, A., Fairhall, N., Close, J. C., & Lord, S. R.
(2011). Exercise to prevent falls in older adults: An updated meta‐ analysis and best practice recommendations. NSW Public Health Bul-
letin, 22(3–4), 78–83. https://doi.org/10.1071/nb10056 Sherrington, C., Whitney, J. C., Lord, S. R., Herbert, R. D., Cumming, R.
G., & Close, J. C. (2008). Effective exercise for the prevention of falls:
A systematic review and meta‐analysis. Journal of the American Medi- cal Directors Association, 56(12), 2234–2243. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2008.02014.x
Shimada, H., Suzukawa, M., Tiedemann, A., Kobayashi, K., Yoshida, H., &
Suzuki, T. (2009). Which neuromuscular or cognitive test is the opti-
mal screening tool to predict falls in frail community‐dwelling older people? Gerontology, 55(5), 532–538. https://doi.org/10.1159/ 000236364
Shumway-Cook, A., Brauer, S., & Woollacott, M. (2000). Predicting the
probability for falls in community‐dwelling older adults using the Timed Up & Go Test. Physical therapy, 80(9), 896–903.
Sievanen, H., Karinkanta, S., Moisio-Vilenius, P., & Ripsaluoma, J. (2014).
Feasibility of whole‐body vibration training in nursing home residents with low physical function: A pilot study. Aging Clinical and Experi-
mental Research, 26(5), 511–517. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520- 014-0206-2
Silva, R. B., Eslick, G. D., & Duque, G. (2013). Exercise for falls and frac-
ture prevention in long term care facilities: A systematic review and
meta‐analysis. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 14, (9)685–689. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2013.05
CAO ET AL. | 2521
Sorensen, S. V., de Lissovoy, G., Kunaprayoon, D., Resnick, B., Rupnow,
M. F., & Studenski, S. (2006). A taxonomy and economic conse-
quences of nursing home falls. Drugs and Aging, 23(3), 251–262. https://doi.org/10.2165/00002512-200623030-00007
Stubbs, B., Denkinger, M. D., Brefka, S., & Dallmeier, D. (2015). What
works to prevent falls in older adults dwelling in long term care facili-
ties and hospitals? An umbrella review of meta‐analyses of ran- domised controlled trials. Maturitas, 81(3), 335–342. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.maturitas.2015.03.026
Tinetti, M. E. (1986). Performance‐oriented assessment of mobility prob- lems in elderly patients. Journal of the American Medical Directors
Association, 34(2), 119–126. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415. 1986.tb05480.x
Ungar, A., Rafanelli, M., Iacomelli, I., Brunetti, M. A., Ceccofiglio, A., Tesi,
F., & Marchionni, N. (2013). Fall prevention in the elderly. Clinical
Cases in Mineral and Bone Metabolism, 10(2), 91–95. Vlaeyen, E., Coussement, J., Leysens, G., van der Elst, E., Delbaere, K.,
Cambier, D., … Milisen, K. (2015). Characteristics and effectiveness of fall prevention programs in nursing homes: A systematic review
and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 63(2), 211–221. https:// doi.org/10.1111/jgs.13254
Wu, T. Y., Chie, W. C., Yang, R. S., Kuo, K. L., Wong, W. K., & Liaw, C. K.
(2013). Risk factors for single and recurrent falls: A prospective study
of falls in community dwelling seniors without cognitive impairment.
Prevention Medicine, 57(5), 511–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.ypmed.2013.07.012
SUPPORTING INFORMATION
Additional supporting information may be found online in the
Supporting Information section at the end of the article.
How to cite this article: Cao P, Zhao Q, Xiao M, Kong L, Xiao
L. The effectiveness of exercise for fall prevention in nursing
home residents: A systematic review meta‐analysis. J Adv Nurs. 2018;74:2511–2522. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/jan.13814
The Journal of Advanced Nursing (JAN) is an international, peer-reviewed, scientific journal. JAN contributes to the advancement of evidence-
based nursing, midwifery and health care by disseminating high quality research and scholarship of contemporary relevance and with potential to
advance knowledge for practice, education, management or policy. JAN publishes research reviews, original research reports and methodological
and theoretical papers.
For further information, please visit JAN on the Wiley Online Library website: www.wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/jan
Reasons to publish your work in JAN:
• High-impact forum: the world's most cited nursing journal, with an Impact Factor of 1·998 – ranked 12/114 in the 2016 ISI Journal Citation Reports © (Nursing (Social Science)).
• Most read nursing journal in the world: over 3 million articles downloaded online per year and accessible in over 10,000 libraries worldwide (including over 3,500 in developing countries with free or low cost access).
• Fast and easy online submission: online submission at http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/jan. • Positive publishing experience: rapid double-blind peer review with constructive feedback. • Rapid online publication in five weeks: average time from final manuscript arriving in production to online publication. • Online Open: the option to pay to make your article freely and openly accessible to non-subscribers upon publication on Wiley Online
Library, as well as the option to deposit the article in your own or your funding agency’s preferred archive (e.g. PubMed).
2522 | CAO ET AL.
