Skip to main content

Table 3 Between-group differences in secondary outcomes from baseline to 12 months

From: Partially supervised exercise programmes for fall prevention improve physical performance of older people at risk of falling: a three-armed multi-centre randomised controlled trial

Outcomes

Experimental group versus reference group

Experimental group versus control group

Reference group versus control group

aMean difference (95% CI)

P value

aMean difference (95% CI)

P value

aMean difference (95% CI)

P value

Falls Efficacy Scale-International scoreb (n = 213)

0.13 (–1.34 to 1.6)

0.862

–1.27 (–3.12 to 0.58)

0.179

–1.4 (–3.25 to 0.46)

0.139

Short Physical Performance Battery scorec (n = 213)

–0.01 (–0.33 to 0.31)

0.963

0.45 (0.05 to 0.86)

0.027*

0.46 (0.06 to 0.86)

0.024*

Five Time Sit to Stand Test, sd (n = 213)

–0.04 (–1.11 to 1.03)

0.941

–2.15 (–3.48 to –0.82)

0.002*

–2.11 (–3.44 to –0.78)

0.002*

Functional Reach test score, cme (n = 209)

0.78 (–1.73 to 3.29)

0.539

0.57 (–2.65 to 3.79)

0.728

–0.21 (–3.45 to 3.02)

0.896

Timed Up and Go Test scoref, s (n = 213)

–0.38 (–1.34 to 0.59)

0.443

–0.61 (–1.83 to 0.6)

0.321

–0.24 (–1.45 to 0.98)

0.701

Older People's Quality of Life Questionnaire-35 scoreg (n = 212)

1.68 (–1.47 to 4.83)

0.295

3.9 (–0.06 to 7.86)

0.053

2.23 (–1.73 to 6.18)

0.269

  1. n = number of participants
  2. * Bold numbers: experimental and reference group were statistically significantly better than control group with P < 0.05
  3. aAdjusted mean differences; adjusted for baseline values of the dependent variable and risk category, age category, rural or urban
  4. bFalls Efficacy Scale-International: higher values in the score indicate more concerns; a positive difference in the table indicates that improvement was better in the right-hand intervention; a negative difference indicates that improvement was better in the left-hand intervention (here from left to right favouring reference group, experimental group, and reference group, respectively)
  5. cShort Physical Performance Battery: higher values in the score indicate better performance; a positive difference indicates that improvement was better in the left-hand intervention; a negative difference indicates that improvement was better in the right-hand intervention (here from left to right favouring reference group, experimental group, and reference group, respectively)
  6. dFive Time Sit to Stand Test: lower score indicates better performance; a negative difference indicates that improvement was better in the right-hand intervention (here from left to right favouring experimental group, experimental group, and reference group, respectively)
  7. eFunctional Reach Test score: higher score indicates better performance; a positive difference indicates that improvement was better in the left-hand intervention; a negative difference indicates that improvement was better in the right-hand intervention (here from left to right favouring experimental group, experimental group, and control group, respectively)
  8. fTimed Up and Go Test score: lower score indicates better performance; a positive difference indicates that improvement was better in the left-hand intervention (here from left to right favouring experimental group, experimental group, and reference group, respectively)
  9. gOlder People's Quality of Life Questionnaire-35 score: higher score indicates better quality of life; a positive difference indicates that improvement was better in the left-hand intervention; a negative difference indicates that improvement was better in the right-hand intervention (here from left to right favouring experimental group, experimental group, and reference group, respectively)
Back to article page

BMC Geriatrics

ISSN: 1471-2318

Contact us