<clinical_study>
  <!-- This xml conforms to an XML Schema at:
    https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/html/images/info/public.xsd -->
  <required_header>
    <download_date>ClinicalTrials.gov processed this data on September 20, 2023</download_date>
    <link_text>Link to the current ClinicalTrials.gov record.</link_text>
    <url>https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03017365</url>
  </required_header>
  <id_info>
    <org_study_id>KFPS17</org_study_id>
    <nct_id>NCT03017365</nct_id>
  </id_info>
  <brief_title>Effects Resistance Training on Motor Control and Cognition</brief_title>
  <acronym>KFPS_2</acronym>
  <official_title>Effects of Different Resistance Training Methods on Strength, Motor Control and Executive Functions in Older Adults</official_title>
  <sponsors>
    <lead_sponsor>
      <agency>University of Kassel</agency>
      <agency_class>Other</agency_class>
    </lead_sponsor>
  </sponsors>
  <source>University of Kassel</source>
  <oversight_info>
    <has_dmc>No</has_dmc>
  </oversight_info>
  <brief_summary>
    <textblock>
      It is well documented that both balance and resistance training have the potential to&#xD;
      mitigate intrinsic fall risk factors in older adults. Recently, it was shown that a&#xD;
      simultaneously executed balance and resistance training, namely resistance training on uneven&#xD;
      surfaces is an eligible, effective and safe alternative training program to mitigate&#xD;
      intrinsic fall risk factors in older adults. However, knowledge about the effects of specific&#xD;
      adductor and abductor training has advantages over traditional resistance training and&#xD;
      resistance training on unstable surfaces regarding forward propulsion. Further, the effects&#xD;
      of different kinds of resistance training on cognition, especially embodiment is&#xD;
      investigated.&#xD;
    </textblock>
  </brief_summary>
  <detailed_description>
    <textblock>
      Introduction: In the course of ageing, physical abilities decline and consequently there is&#xD;
      an increase in risk of falling and fall incidences. Notwithstanding, the fact that causes of&#xD;
      falls are multifactorial, losses in lower-extremity muscle strength, power and balance seem&#xD;
      to be the most prominent intrinsic (i.e., person-related) fall risk factors in older adults.&#xD;
      Several systematic reviews and meta-analyses highlighted the positive effects of resistance&#xD;
      and balance training when applied as a single means, on measures of leg muscle strength,&#xD;
      power and balance in older adults. Recently, it was shown that a simultaneously executed&#xD;
      balance and resistance training, namely resistance training on uneven surfaces is an&#xD;
      eligible, effective and safe alternative training program to mitigate intrinsic fall risk&#xD;
      factors in older adults. Based on several investigations, it can be safely assumed that&#xD;
      exercises conducted on unstable devices activate smaller muscles and stabilising function of&#xD;
      bigger muscle groups. This facilitates torque and power transfer from lower to upper&#xD;
      extremeties and is possibly responsible for similar effects as compared to stable resistance&#xD;
      training despite lower loads. However, it is unknown if resistance training targeting&#xD;
      adductor and abductor muscles induces similar results as compared to resistance training&#xD;
      conducted on uneven surfaces. Moreover, physical activity has proven to affect cognitive&#xD;
      measures positively, especially executive functions. It has yet to be determined to what&#xD;
      extent different kinds of resistance training affect executive functions.&#xD;
&#xD;
      Methods/Design: This study is a three-arm, 10-week RCT with a 10-week no-contact follow-up.&#xD;
      Participants were randomly allocated (1:1) to either: 1) machine-based stable resistance&#xD;
      training (M-SRT); 2) free-weight unstable resistance training (F-URT); 3) machine-based&#xD;
      adductor and abductor resistance training. The design and reporting of this study follows the&#xD;
      CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) 2010 Statement for parallel group&#xD;
      randomised trials.&#xD;
&#xD;
      Setting Participants are recruited from the communities in and around Kassel, Germany.&#xD;
      Screening visits, measurement sessions, and the interventions are held at the Insitute of&#xD;
      Sports and Sports Science / University of Kassel, Germany.&#xD;
&#xD;
      Recruitment strategies: Recruitment is carried out by placing 1) an advertisement in the&#xD;
      local newspaper, 2) during a public information meeting at the local town hall and 3) word of&#xD;
      mouth. Interested individuals contact the study coordinator by phone, where they are provided&#xD;
      with a brief description of the study. If responses suggest study eligibility then interested&#xD;
      individuals are invited to attend a formal in-person screening visit.&#xD;
&#xD;
      Participants:Older adults are eligible if they: 1) are aged between 65 and 80 years old 2)&#xD;
      and able to walk independently for more than 10m. An a priori power analysis using G*Power&#xD;
      3.1 with an assumed type I error of .05 and a type II error of .10 (90% statistical power,&#xD;
      correlation among groups: .5, nonsphericity correction: 1) was computed to determine an&#xD;
      appropriate sample size to detect medium (.50 ≤ d ≤ .79) interaction effects. The&#xD;
      calculations were based on a study assessing the effects of core strength training using&#xD;
      unstable devices on older adults. The analysis revealed the requirement of 54 participants&#xD;
      (18 per group) to obtain medium &quot;time x group&quot; interaction effects. Considering the&#xD;
      likelihood of dropouts, at least 83 participants are going to be recruited to compensate for&#xD;
      a possible dropout rate of ~20%.&#xD;
&#xD;
      Interventions: All intervention groups train for ten weeks, twice per week on non-consecutive&#xD;
      days for 60 minutes each. The 10-week intervention period consistes of a one week&#xD;
      introductory phase and three major training blocks lasting three weeks each. Training&#xD;
      intensity is progressively and individually increased over the 10-week training program by&#xD;
      modulating load and sets for all groups and level of instability for F-URT. After week one&#xD;
      (50 %), four (60%), and seven (70%) the training load (weight) is increased following one&#xD;
      repetition maximum (1-RM) testing for each major exercise. M-SRT followes a 'traditional'&#xD;
      machine-based stable resistance training program, including squats with a smith-machine and a&#xD;
      leg press. F-URT conducts squats and front lunges on unstable devices. M-ART uses adductor&#xD;
      and abductor strength training machines. All three intervention groups conduct a resistance&#xD;
      training program consisting of two main exercises, a preparation and cool-down phase.&#xD;
      Participants perform ten minutes of low-intensity stepping on a stair-walker as a brief&#xD;
      warm-up at the beginning of each training session, followed by the resistance exercises and&#xD;
      walking on a treadmill as cool-down. Training under unstable surface conditions, especially&#xD;
      with additional weight, implies a certain degree of accident risk. Due to this factor, all&#xD;
      instability exercises are observed by instructors and secured with additional aids like&#xD;
      boxes. Training is supervised by skilled instructors at all times. For the first two weeks&#xD;
      the participant to instructor ratio will be 5:1, thereafter 10:1.&#xD;
&#xD;
      Outcome assessment: Outcomes are measured at baseline, 10 weeks (intervention endpoint) and&#xD;
      20 weeks (study endpoint). Measurement sessions are conducted on one day.&#xD;
&#xD;
      Baseline data: Baseline measurements are obtained prior to randomisation. In addition to the&#xD;
      measurements described below, the following are also collected: demographic and general&#xD;
      health characteristics; medical history and medications; anthropometrics and rate of falls /&#xD;
      near falls.&#xD;
    </textblock>
  </detailed_description>
  <overall_status>Completed</overall_status>
  <start_date type="Actual">January 2017</start_date>
  <completion_date type="Actual">April 1, 2017</completion_date>
  <primary_completion_date type="Actual">April 1, 2017</primary_completion_date>
  <phase>N/A</phase>
  <study_type>Interventional</study_type>
  <has_expanded_access>No</has_expanded_access>
  <study_design_info>
    <allocation>Randomized</allocation>
    <intervention_model>Parallel Assignment</intervention_model>
    <primary_purpose>Treatment</primary_purpose>
    <masking>Single (Outcomes Assessor)</masking>
  </study_design_info>
  <primary_outcome>
    <measure>Clinical Gait Analysis</measure>
    <time_frame>Pre test -&gt; Intervention (10 weeks) -&gt; Post test (within 2-5 days after the intervention)</time_frame>
    <description>changes in variance components (Vucm, Vort, Vtot) of an uncontrolled manifold analysis; measured in rad²</description>
  </primary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Maximal isometric leg extension strength (ILES)</measure>
    <time_frame>Pre test -&gt; Intervention (10 weeks) -&gt; Post test (within 2-5 days after the intervention)</time_frame>
    <description>change in isometric strength, measured in N</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Fall self-efficacy Questionnaire</measure>
    <time_frame>Pre test -&gt; Intervention (10 weeks) -&gt; Post test (within 2-5 days after the intervention)</time_frame>
    <description>change in anxiety score</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Proactivec Balance (timed up and go test)</measure>
    <time_frame>Pre test -&gt; Intervention (10 weeks) -&gt; Post test (within 2-5 days after the intervention)</time_frame>
    <description>change in leg strength and procative balance (seconds)</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Maximal isometric adductor and abductor strength</measure>
    <time_frame>Pre test -&gt; Intervention (10 weeks) -&gt; Post test (within 2-5 days after the intervention)</time_frame>
    <description>change in isometric strength, measured in N</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Stroop Task</measure>
    <time_frame>Pre test -&gt; Intervention (10 weeks) -&gt; Post test (within 2-5 days after the intervention)</time_frame>
    <description>change in reaction time to congruent and incongruent stimuli (ms)</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Proactivec Balance (multidirectional reach test)</measure>
    <time_frame>Pre test -&gt; Intervention (10 weeks) -&gt; Post test (within 2-5 days after the intervention)</time_frame>
    <description>change in proactive balance (cm)</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <secondary_outcome>
    <measure>Power tests (chair rise test)</measure>
    <time_frame>Pre test -&gt; Intervention (10 weeks) -&gt; Post test (within 2-5 days after the intervention)</time_frame>
    <description>change in muscle power (seconds)</description>
  </secondary_outcome>
  <number_of_arms>3</number_of_arms>
  <enrollment type="Actual">82</enrollment>
  <condition>Muscle Weakness</condition>
  <arm_group>
    <arm_group_label>M-SRT</arm_group_label>
    <arm_group_type>Active Comparator</arm_group_type>
    <description>Machine-based stable resistance training. Exercising 'traditional' machine-based resistance training.</description>
  </arm_group>
  <arm_group>
    <arm_group_label>F-URT</arm_group_label>
    <arm_group_type>Experimental</arm_group_type>
    <description>Free weight unstable resistance training; conducted free-weight resistance training on unstable devices using dumbbells instead of exercise-machines.</description>
  </arm_group>
  <arm_group>
    <arm_group_label>M-ART</arm_group_label>
    <arm_group_type>Experimental</arm_group_type>
    <description>Machine-based adductor/abductor resistance training. Exercising with 'traditional' adductor/abductor machines.</description>
  </arm_group>
  <intervention>
    <intervention_type>Other</intervention_type>
    <intervention_name>Stable Resistance Training</intervention_name>
    <description>traditional machine-based resistance training</description>
    <arm_group_label>M-SRT</arm_group_label>
  </intervention>
  <intervention>
    <intervention_type>Other</intervention_type>
    <intervention_name>Unstable Resistance Training</intervention_name>
    <description>free weight resistance training using unstable devices</description>
    <arm_group_label>F-URT</arm_group_label>
  </intervention>
  <intervention>
    <intervention_type>Other</intervention_type>
    <intervention_name>Adductor/Abductor Resistance Training</intervention_name>
    <description>machine-based adductor/abductor resistance training</description>
    <arm_group_label>M-ART</arm_group_label>
  </intervention>
  <eligibility>
    <criteria>
      <textblock>
        Inclusion Criteria:&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  between 65 and 80 years old&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  ability to walk independently without any gait aid&#xD;
&#xD;
        Exclusion Criteria:&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  pathological ratings of the Clock Drawing Test (CDT),&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Mini-Mental-State-Examination (MMSE, &lt; 24 points),&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Falls Efficacy Scale - International (FES-I, &gt; 24 points),&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS, &gt; 9 points),&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Freiburg Questionnaire of Physical Activity (FQoPA, &lt; 1hour)&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB-D, &lt; 18 points)&#xD;
&#xD;
          -  any neurological, musculoskeletal or heart-related disease&#xD;
      </textblock>
    </criteria>
    <gender>All</gender>
    <minimum_age>65 Years</minimum_age>
    <maximum_age>80 Years</maximum_age>
    <healthy_volunteers>Accepts Healthy Volunteers</healthy_volunteers>
  </eligibility>
  <overall_official>
    <last_name>Armin Kibele, PhD</last_name>
    <role>Study Chair</role>
    <affiliation>University of Kassel</affiliation>
  </overall_official>
  <reference>
    <citation>Eckardt N. Lower-extremity resistance training on unstable surfaces improves proxies of muscle strength, power and balance in healthy older adults: a randomised control trial. BMC Geriatr. 2016 Nov 24;16(1):191. doi: 10.1186/s12877-016-0366-3.</citation>
    <PMID>27881086</PMID>
  </reference>
  <reference>
    <citation>Granacher U, Muehlbauer T, Gruber M. A qualitative review of balance and strength performance in healthy older adults: impact for testing and training. J Aging Res. 2012;2012:708905. doi: 10.1155/2012/708905. Epub 2012 Jan 23.</citation>
    <PMID>22315687</PMID>
  </reference>
  <reference>
    <citation>Steadman J, Donaldson N, Kalra L. A randomized controlled trial of an enhanced balance training program to improve mobility and reduce falls in elderly patients. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2003 Jun;51(6):847-52. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2389.2003.51268.x.</citation>
    <PMID>12757574</PMID>
  </reference>
  <reference>
    <citation>Behm DG, Muehlbauer T, Kibele A, Granacher U. Effects of Strength Training Using Unstable Surfaces on Strength, Power and Balance Performance Across the Lifespan: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Sports Med. 2015 Dec;45(12):1645-69. doi: 10.1007/s40279-015-0384-x. Erratum In: Sports Med. 2016 Mar;46(3):451.</citation>
    <PMID>26359066</PMID>
  </reference>
  <verification_date>February 2018</verification_date>
  <study_first_submitted>January 4, 2017</study_first_submitted>
  <study_first_submitted_qc>January 9, 2017</study_first_submitted_qc>
  <study_first_posted type="Estimate">January 11, 2017</study_first_posted>
  <last_update_submitted>February 6, 2018</last_update_submitted>
  <last_update_submitted_qc>February 6, 2018</last_update_submitted_qc>
  <last_update_posted type="Actual">February 7, 2018</last_update_posted>
  <responsible_party>
    <responsible_party_type>Sponsor</responsible_party_type>
  </responsible_party>
  <keyword>Motor Control</keyword>
  <keyword>Balance</keyword>
  <condition_browse>
    <!-- CAUTION:  The following MeSH terms are assigned with an imperfect algorithm            -->
    <mesh_term>Muscle Weakness</mesh_term>
  </condition_browse>
  <patient_data>
    <sharing_ipd>Yes</sharing_ipd>
    <ipd_description>Raw results will be published. Age will be described as intervals (65-69, 70-74, 75-80) and height will be removed, thus no backtracking is possible</ipd_description>
    <ipd_info_type>Statistical Analysis Plan (SAP)</ipd_info_type>
    <ipd_time_frame>when the article is published</ipd_time_frame>
    <ipd_access_criteria>IPD will be published as supplementary material. Raw results will be published. Age will be described as intervals (65-69, 70-74, 75-80) and height will be removed, thus no backtracking is possible</ipd_access_criteria>
  </patient_data>
  <!-- Results have not yet been posted for this study                                          -->
</clinical_study>


download date: ClinicalTrials.gov processed this data on September 20, 2023
link text: Link to the current ClinicalTrials.gov record.
url: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03017365
org study id: KFPS17
nct id: NCT03017365
lead sponsor: 
has dmc: No
It is well documented that both balance and resistance training have the potential to
      mitigate intrinsic fall risk factors in older adults. Recently, it was shown that a
      simultaneously executed balance and resistance training, namely resistance training on uneven
      surfaces is an eligible, effective and safe alternative training program to mitigate
      intrinsic fall risk factors in older adults. However, knowledge about the effects of specific
      adductor and abductor training has advantages over traditional resistance training and
      resistance training on unstable surfaces regarding forward propulsion. Further, the effects
      of different kinds of resistance training on cognition, especially embodiment is
      investigated.
Introduction: In the course of ageing, physical abilities decline and consequently there is
      an increase in risk of falling and fall incidences. Notwithstanding, the fact that causes of
      falls are multifactorial, losses in lower-extremity muscle strength, power and balance seem
      to be the most prominent intrinsic (i.e., person-related) fall risk factors in older adults.
      Several systematic reviews and meta-analyses highlighted the positive effects of resistance
      and balance training when applied as a single means, on measures of leg muscle strength,
      power and balance in older adults. Recently, it was shown that a simultaneously executed
      balance and resistance training, namely resistance training on uneven surfaces is an
      eligible, effective and safe alternative training program to mitigate intrinsic fall risk
      factors in older adults. Based on several investigations, it can be safely assumed that
      exercises conducted on unstable devices activate smaller muscles and stabilising function of
      bigger muscle groups. This facilitates torque and power transfer from lower to upper
      extremeties and is possibly responsible for similar effects as compared to stable resistance
      training despite lower loads. However, it is unknown if resistance training targeting
      adductor and abductor muscles induces similar results as compared to resistance training
      conducted on uneven surfaces. Moreover, physical activity has proven to affect cognitive
      measures positively, especially executive functions. It has yet to be determined to what
      extent different kinds of resistance training affect executive functions.

      Methods/Design: This study is a three-arm, 10-week RCT with a 10-week no-contact follow-up.
      Participants were randomly allocated (1:1) to either: 1) machine-based stable resistance
      training (M-SRT); 2) free-weight unstable resistance training (F-URT); 3) machine-based
      adductor and abductor resistance training. The design and reporting of this study follows the
      CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) 2010 Statement for parallel group
      randomised trials.

      Setting Participants are recruited from the communities in and around Kassel, Germany.
      Screening visits, measurement sessions, and the interventions are held at the Insitute of
      Sports and Sports Science / University of Kassel, Germany.

      Recruitment strategies: Recruitment is carried out by placing 1) an advertisement in the
      local newspaper, 2) during a public information meeting at the local town hall and 3) word of
      mouth. Interested individuals contact the study coordinator by phone, where they are provided
      with a brief description of the study. If responses suggest study eligibility then interested
      individuals are invited to attend a formal in-person screening visit.

      Participants:Older adults are eligible if they: 1) are aged between 65 and 80 years old 2)
      and able to walk independently for more than 10m. An a priori power analysis using G*Power
      3.1 with an assumed type I error of .05 and a type II error of .10 (90% statistical power,
      correlation among groups: .5, nonsphericity correction: 1) was computed to determine an
      appropriate sample size to detect medium (.50 ≤ d ≤ .79) interaction effects. The
      calculations were based on a study assessing the effects of core strength training using
      unstable devices on older adults. The analysis revealed the requirement of 54 participants
      (18 per group) to obtain medium "time x group" interaction effects. Considering the
      likelihood of dropouts, at least 83 participants are going to be recruited to compensate for
      a possible dropout rate of ~20%.

      Interventions: All intervention groups train for ten weeks, twice per week on non-consecutive
      days for 60 minutes each. The 10-week intervention period consistes of a one week
      introductory phase and three major training blocks lasting three weeks each. Training
      intensity is progressively and individually increased over the 10-week training program by
      modulating load and sets for all groups and level of instability for F-URT. After week one
      (50 %), four (60%), and seven (70%) the training load (weight) is increased following one
      repetition maximum (1-RM) testing for each major exercise. M-SRT followes a 'traditional'
      machine-based stable resistance training program, including squats with a smith-machine and a
      leg press. F-URT conducts squats and front lunges on unstable devices. M-ART uses adductor
      and abductor strength training machines. All three intervention groups conduct a resistance
      training program consisting of two main exercises, a preparation and cool-down phase.
      Participants perform ten minutes of low-intensity stepping on a stair-walker as a brief
      warm-up at the beginning of each training session, followed by the resistance exercises and
      walking on a treadmill as cool-down. Training under unstable surface conditions, especially
      with additional weight, implies a certain degree of accident risk. Due to this factor, all
      instability exercises are observed by instructors and secured with additional aids like
      boxes. Training is supervised by skilled instructors at all times. For the first two weeks
      the participant to instructor ratio will be 5:1, thereafter 10:1.

      Outcome assessment: Outcomes are measured at baseline, 10 weeks (intervention endpoint) and
      20 weeks (study endpoint). Measurement sessions are conducted on one day.

      Baseline data: Baseline measurements are obtained prior to randomisation. In addition to the
      measurements described below, the following are also collected: demographic and general
      health characteristics; medical history and medications; anthropometrics and rate of falls /
      near falls.
allocation: Randomized
intervention model: Parallel Assignment
primary purpose: Treatment
masking: Single (Outcomes Assessor)
measure: Clinical Gait Analysis
time frame: Pre test -> Intervention (10 weeks) -> Post test (within 2-5 days after the intervention)
description: changes in variance components (Vucm, Vort, Vtot) of an uncontrolled manifold analysis; measured in rad²
measure: Maximal isometric leg extension strength (ILES)
time frame: Pre test -> Intervention (10 weeks) -> Post test (within 2-5 days after the intervention)
description: change in isometric strength, measured in N
measure: Fall self-efficacy Questionnaire
time frame: Pre test -> Intervention (10 weeks) -> Post test (within 2-5 days after the intervention)
description: change in anxiety score
measure: Proactivec Balance (timed up and go test)
time frame: Pre test -> Intervention (10 weeks) -> Post test (within 2-5 days after the intervention)
description: change in leg strength and procative balance (seconds)
measure: Maximal isometric adductor and abductor strength
time frame: Pre test -> Intervention (10 weeks) -> Post test (within 2-5 days after the intervention)
description: change in isometric strength, measured in N
measure: Stroop Task
time frame: Pre test -> Intervention (10 weeks) -> Post test (within 2-5 days after the intervention)
description: change in reaction time to congruent and incongruent stimuli (ms)
measure: Proactivec Balance (multidirectional reach test)
time frame: Pre test -> Intervention (10 weeks) -> Post test (within 2-5 days after the intervention)
description: change in proactive balance (cm)
measure: Power tests (chair rise test)
time frame: Pre test -> Intervention (10 weeks) -> Post test (within 2-5 days after the intervention)
description: change in muscle power (seconds)
arm group label: M-SRT
arm group type: Active Comparator
description: Machine-based stable resistance training. Exercising 'traditional' machine-based resistance training.
arm group label: F-URT
arm group type: Experimental
description: Free weight unstable resistance training; conducted free-weight resistance training on unstable devices using dumbbells instead of exercise-machines.
arm group label: M-ART
arm group type: Experimental
description: Machine-based adductor/abductor resistance training. Exercising with 'traditional' adductor/abductor machines.
intervention type: Other
intervention name: Stable Resistance Training
description: traditional machine-based resistance training
arm group label: M-SRT
intervention type: Other
intervention name: Unstable Resistance Training
description: free weight resistance training using unstable devices
arm group label: F-URT
intervention type: Other
intervention name: Adductor/Abductor Resistance Training
description: machine-based adductor/abductor resistance training
arm group label: M-ART
criteria: 
gender: All
minimum age: 65 Years
maximum age: 80 Years
healthy volunteers: Accepts Healthy Volunteers
last name: Armin Kibele, PhD
role: Study Chair
affiliation: University of Kassel
citation: Eckardt N. Lower-extremity resistance training on unstable surfaces improves proxies of muscle strength, power and balance in healthy older adults: a randomised control trial. BMC Geriatr. 2016 Nov 24;16(1):191. doi: 10.1186/s12877-016-0366-3.
PMID: 27881086
citation: Granacher U, Muehlbauer T, Gruber M. A qualitative review of balance and strength performance in healthy older adults: impact for testing and training. J Aging Res. 2012;2012:708905. doi: 10.1155/2012/708905. Epub 2012 Jan 23.
PMID: 22315687
citation: Steadman J, Donaldson N, Kalra L. A randomized controlled trial of an enhanced balance training program to improve mobility and reduce falls in elderly patients. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2003 Jun;51(6):847-52. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2389.2003.51268.x.
PMID: 12757574
citation: Behm DG, Muehlbauer T, Kibele A, Granacher U. Effects of Strength Training Using Unstable Surfaces on Strength, Power and Balance Performance Across the Lifespan: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Sports Med. 2015 Dec;45(12):1645-69. doi: 10.1007/s40279-015-0384-x. Erratum In: Sports Med. 2016 Mar;46(3):451.
PMID: 26359066
responsible party type: Sponsor
mesh term: Muscle Weakness
sharing ipd: Yes
ipd description: Raw results will be published. Age will be described as intervals (65-69, 70-74, 75-80) and height will be removed, thus no backtracking is possible
ipd info type: Statistical Analysis Plan (SAP)
ipd time frame: when the article is published
ipd access criteria: IPD will be published as supplementary material. Raw results will be published. Age will be described as intervals (65-69, 70-74, 75-80) and height will be removed, thus no backtracking is possible