Maintaining or improving quality of life (QoL) is a key outcome of clinical interventions in older people. Fear of falling (FoF) is associated with activity restriction as well as with poorer physical and cognitive functions and may be an important contributor to a diminished QoL. The objectives of this systematic review were to determine i) the effect of FoF on QoL in older people, ii) whether the association between these two constructs depends on the use of specific conceptualizations and measurement instruments, and iii) the role of fall events as mediating factor in this relationship. Four electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library) were searched from their inceptions to February 2018. Thirty mostly cross-sectional studies in nearly 30.000 people (weighted mean age 75.6 years (SD =6.1); 73% women) were included. FoF was associated with QoL in most studies, and this association appeared to be independent of the conceptualization of FoF. Moreover, this relationship was independent of falls people experienced which seemed to have a lower impact. FoF should be considered not only as by-product of falls and targeted interventions in parts different from those to reduce falls are likely required. Studies are needed showing that reducing FoF will lead to increased QoL.

Background: Identification of older persons at risk for the loss of independence, onset of (co)-morbidity or functional limitations through screening/assessment is of interest for the public health-care system. To date several different measurement instruments for overall physical function are frequently used in practice, but little information about their psychometric properties is available.

The purpose of this study was to determine the dose-response relationship of resistance training (RT) to improve strength and function in older adults. A systematic literature search was performed in relevant databases and study reference lists to identify randomized controlled trials. Randomized controlled trials comparing the effects of different doses of strength training in older people (65 yr and older) on strength and functional outcomes were eligible. Two independent reviewers decided on study inclusion, extracted data, and assessed methodological quality. Standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for relevant outcomes and pooled using a random-effects model. Twenty-nine trials with a total of 1313 subjects (mean age = 65-81 yr) are summarized in this review. Trials comparing different training intensities show strong effects of progressive resistance training (PRT) on maximal strength in a dose-dependent manner, with high-intensity (HI) PRT being more effective compared with moderate (MI)- and low-intensity (LI) PRT (SMD [HI vs LI] = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.21-1.55; SMD [HI vs MI] = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.22-1.03). PRT was also successful for improving functional outcomes, but gains were independent of training intensity. Power training (PT) was more effective for improving muscle power (SMD [PT vs PRT] = 1.66, 95% CI = 0.08-3.24) and functional outcomes than PRT. There was only little information available on training volume and frequency. Higher training intensities are superior to lower intensities for improving maximal strength but not necessarily for functional performance of older adults. PT has shown to be a particularly effective method for enhancing muscle power and functional performance. More research is necessary to identify the effect of different training volumes and frequencies and the dose-response relationship for very old and frail populations.

Objective: To examine the effects of stepping interventions on fall risk factors and fall incidence in older people.Data source: Electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane, CENTRAL) and reference lists of included articles from inception to March 2015.Study selection: Randomised (RCT) or clinical controlled trials (CCT) of volitional and reactive stepping interventions that included older (minimum age 60) people providing data on falls or fall risk factors.Results: Meta-analyses of seven RCTs (n=660) showed that the stepping interventions significantly reduced the rate of falls (rate ratio=0.48, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.65, p<0.0001, I²=0%) and the proportion of fallers (risk ratio=0.51, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.68, p<0.0001, I²=0%). Subgroup analyses stratified by reactive and volitional stepping interventions revealed a similar efficacy for rate of falls and proportion of fallers. A meta-analysis of two RCTs (n=62) showed that stepping interventions significantly reduced laboratory-induced falls, and meta-analysis findings of up to five RCTs and CCTs (n=36–416) revealed that stepping interventions significantly improved simple and choice stepping reaction time, single leg stance, timed up and go performance (p<0.05), but not measures of strength.Conclusions: The findings indicate that both reactive and volitional stepping interventions reduce falls among older adults by approximately 50%. This clinically significant reduction may be due to improvements in reaction time, gait, balance and balance recovery but not in strength. Further high-quality studies aimed at maximising the effectiveness and feasibility of stepping interventions are required.Systematic reviews registration number: CRD42015017357.