Influence of a multicomponent exercise intervention on fear of falling and gait parameters in community-dwelling older adults: a prospective study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUNDS: The effects of exercise interventions on gait parameters and fear of falling (FOF) have been under-explored and the influence of FOF on exercise-induced adaptations of gait parameters is unclear. This interventional and comparative pilot study aimed to explore the influence of FOF status on gait parameters changes following a multicomponent exercise intervention in community-dwelling older adults at risk of mobility disability and implemented in routine care. METHODS: One-hundred five older adults (80.63 ± 5.80 years) completed a supervised group-based exercise (6–8 participants) intervention (10 weeks, 2x/week, 1 h). Participants of this open cohort and prospective study were divided a-posteriori in 2 subgroups: with FOF subgroup (Falls Efficacy Scale-International (FES-I) > 23; n = 64) or without FOF subgroup (FES-I ≤ 23; n = 41). A two-way repeated measure ANOVA was performed to measure time, group and group*time interactions effects. Paired t-test were performed to measure changes within the subgroups. Correlations were performed between FOF delta’s changes and gait parameters changes. Spatiotemporal gait parameters (i.e. gait speed; stride variability, symmetry, length; swing, stance and double support phases; lift and strike angles; number of cycles at the turn; turning angle), perceived gait quality (i.e. the “Locomotion” domain of the “SarQoL®” questionnaire), functional parameters (i.e. Short Physical Performance Battery and its subtests; Timed Up and Go) and FOF were assessed. RESULTS: A time effect was observed for all spatial gait parameters (p < .05), all functional parameters (p < .001), perceived gait quality (p < .001) and FOF (p < .01) assessed after the intervention for the total cohort. A group effect was observed for FOF (p < .001), spatiotemporal gait parameters (p < .05) and perceived gait quality (p < .001). A group*time interaction was only observed for FOF (p < .001). Stride length, lift off angle, strike angle and turning angle (p < .05) improved in both subgroups. Stride variability (p < .05) and FOF (p < .001) improved only in the FOF subgroup. Correlations between gait parameters changes and FOF changes were only observed in FOF subgroup for double support phase (r =.25, p < .05), swing phase (r =-.25, p < .05) and stance phase (r =.25, p < .05). A moderate correlation was observed between FOF changes and perceived gait quality changes (r =-.49, p < .01) in no-FOF subgroup. This correlation became weak for the total cohort (r =-.25, p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate that a multicomponent exercise intervention lead to significant changes in FOF, spatial gait parameters and perceived gait quality in older adults and more in those with FOF. Thus, this routine care intervention could be widely proposed to older adults at risk of falls, and particularly to those with a FOF. Finally, although FOF and gait parameters are related, their changes over time do not seem to be as related. This study confirmed that managing the FOF is complex, multifactorial and might be orientated to a holistic approach. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03667664 (registration date: 12/09/2018) and NCT06659484 (registration date: 26/10/2024).
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».