Objective: Previous meta-analyses have found that exercise prevents falls in older people. This study aimed to test whether this effect is still present when new trials are added, and it explores whether characteristics of the trial design, sample or intervention are associated with greater fall prevention effects.Design: Update of a systematic review with random effects meta-analysis and meta-regression.Data sources: Cochrane Library, CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, PEDro and SafetyLit were searched from January 2010 to January 2016.Study eligibility criteria: We included randomised controlled trials that compared fall rates in older people randomised to receive exercise as a single intervention with fall rates in those randomised to a control group.Results: 99 comparisons from 88 trials with 19 478 participants were available for meta-analysis. Overall, exercise reduced the rate of falls in community-dwelling older people by 21% (pooled rate ratio 0.79, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.85, p<0.001, I²47%, 69 comparisons) with greater effects seen from exercise programmes that challenged balance and involved more than 3 hours/week of exercise. These variables explained 76% of the between-trial heterogeneity and in combination led to a 39% reduction in falls (incident rate ratio 0.61, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.72, p<0.001). Exercise also had a fall prevention effect in community-dwelling people with Parkinson's disease (pooled rate ratio 0.47, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.73, p=0.001, I²65%, 6 comparisons) or cognitive impairment (pooled rate ratio 0.55, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.83, p=0.004, I²21%, 3 comparisons). There was no evidence of a fall prevention effect of exercise in residential care settings or among stroke survivors or people recently discharged from hospital.Summary/conclusions: Exercise as a single intervention can prevent falls in community-dwelling older people. Exercise programmes that challenge balance and are of a higher dose have larger effects. The impact of exercise as a single intervention in clinical groups and aged care facility residents requires further investigation, but promising results are evident for people with Parkinson's disease and cognitive impairment.

The purpose of this perspective article is to describe the use of a physiological profile approach to falls risk assessment and prevention that has been developed by the Falls and Balance Research Group of the Prince of Wales Medical Research Institute, Sydney, Australia. The profile's use for people with a variety of factors that put them at risk for falls is discussed. The Physiological Profile Assessment (PPA) involves a series of simple tests of vision, peripheral sensation, muscle force, reaction time, and postural sway. The tests can be administered quickly, and all equipment needed is portable. The results can be used to differentiate people who are at risk for falls (“fallers”) from people who are not at risk for falls (“nonfallers”). A computer program using data from the PPA can be used to assess an individual's performance in relation to a normative database so that deficits can be targeted for intervention. The PPA provides valid and reliable measurements that can be used for assessing falls risk and evaluating the effectiveness of interventions and is suitable for use in a range of physical therapy and health care settings.

Background. Sit-to-stand (STS) performance is often used as a measure of lower-limb strength in older people and those with significant weakness. However, the findings of recent studies suggest that performance in this test is also influenced by factors associated with balance and mobility. We conducted a study to determine whether sensorimotor, balance, and psychological factors in addition to lower-limb strength predict sit-to-stand performance in older people. Methods. Six hundred and sixty nine community-dwelling men and women aged 75–93 years (mean age 78.9, SD = 4.1) underwent quantitative tests of strength, vision, peripheral sensation, reaction time, balance, health status, and sit-to-stand performance. Results. Many physiological and psychological factors were significantly associated with sit-to-stand times in univariate analyses. Multiple regression analysis revealed that visual contrast sensitivity, lower limb proprioception, peripheral tactile sensitivity, reaction time involving a foot-press response, sway with eyes open on a foam rubber mat, body weight, and scores on the Short-Form 12 Health Status Questionnaire pain, anxiety, and vitality scales in addition to knee extension, knee flexion, and ankle dorsiflexion strength were significant and independent predictors of STS performance. Of these measures, quadriceps strength had the highest beta weight, indicating it was the most important variable in explaining the variance in STS times. However, the remaining measures accounted for more than half the explained variance in STS times. The final regression model explained 34.9% of the variance in STS times (multiple R = .59). Conclusions. The findings indicate that, in community-dwelling older people, STS performance is influenced by multiple physiological and psychological processes and represents a particular transfer skill, rather than a proxy measure of lower limb strength.

Objective: this study aimed to perform a comprehensive validation of the 16-item and 7-item Falls Efficacy Scale International (FES-I) by investigating the overall structure and measurement properties, convergent and predictive validity and responsiveness to change. Method: five hundred community-dwelling older people (70–90 years) were assessed on the FES-I in conjunction with demographic, physiological and neuropsychological measures at baseline and at 12 months. Falls were monitored monthly and fear of falling every 3 months. Results: the overall structure and measurement properties of both FES-I scales, as evaluated with item response theory, were good. Discriminative ability on physiological and neuropsychological measures indicated excellent validity, both at baseline (n = 500, convergent validity) and at 1-year follow-up (n = 463, predictive validity). The longitudinal follow-up suggested that FES-I scores increased over time regardless of any fall event, with a trend for a stronger increase in FES-I scores when a person suffered multiple falls in a 3-month period. Additionally, using receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves, cut-points were defined to differentiate between lower and higher levels of concern. Conclusions: the current study builds on the previously established psychometric properties of the FES-I. Both scales have acceptable structures, good validity and reliability and can be recommended for research and clinical purposes. Future studies should explore the FES-I's responsiveness to change during intervention studies and confirm suggested cut-points in other settings, larger samples and across different cultures.