Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether age, sex, depression, dementia disorder, nutritional status, or level of functional balance capacity influences the effect of a high-intensity functional weight-bearing exercise program on functional balance. DESIGN: Preplanned subgroup analyses of a randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Nine residential care facilities. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred ninety-one people aged 65 to 100 dependent in activities of daily living and with Mini-Mental State Examination scores of 10 or greater. INTERVENTION: A high-intensity functional weight-bearing exercise program or a control activity, each comprising 29 sessions over 3 months. MEASUREMENTS: Functional balance capacity was assessed blindly using the Berg Balance Scale (BBS) at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months. The BBS consists of 14 tasks, common in everyday life, such as standing up from sitting and, while standing, reaching forward or turning 360°. Interactions between allocation to activity group and each subgroup were evaluated according to the intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS: The subgroup analyses revealed no statistically significant interaction for age, sex, depression, dementia disorder, nutritional status, or level of functional balance capacity at 3 (P=.65, .65, .51, .78, .09, .67, respectively) or 6 (P=.69, .62, .20, .94, .48, .85, respectively) months. In addition, at 3 and 6 months there was no significant interaction for cognitive level (P=.28, .47, respectively) or number of depressive symptoms (P=.85, .49, respectively). CONCLUSION: Older age, female sex, depression, mild to moderate dementia syndrome, malnutrition, and severe physical impairment do not seem to have a negative effect on functional balance from a high-intensity functional weight-bearing exercise program. Consequently, people with these characteristics in residential care facilities should not be excluded from offers of rehabilitation including high-intensity exercises.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Littbrand et al. (2011) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: