Home › Research › Digital health tools
Balance and strength training in older adults: intervention gains and Tai Chi maintenance
Wolfson L, Whipple R, Derby C, Judge J, King M, Amerman P, Schmidt J, Smyers D.. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 1996-05-01
Topic: Health services, long-term care and technology
Objective To determine the effect on balance and strength of 3 months of intensive balance and/or weight training followed by 6 months of low intensity Tai Chi training for maintenance of gains. Design Randomized control intervention. Four groups in 2 x 2 design: Control, Balance, Strength, Balance + Strength, using blinded testers. Setting Exercise and balance laboratory at University of Connecticut Health Center. Participants Subjects were 110 healthy community dwellers (mean age 80) who were free of dementia, neurological disease, and serious cardiovascular or musculoskeletal conditions. Interventions Short-term training (3 months) occurred 3 times/week (45 minutes Balance and Strength, 90 minutes Balance + Strength). Balance training included equilibrium control exercises of firm and foam surfaces and center-of-pressure biofeedback. Strengthening consisted of lower extremity weight-lifting. All subjects than received long-term group Tai Chi instruction (6 months, 1 hour, 1 time/week). Measurements Losses of balance during Sensory Organization Testing (LOB), single stance time (SST), voluntary limits of stability (FBOS), summed isokinetic torque of eight lower extremity movements (ISOK), and usual gait velocity (GVU). Results and conclusions Balance training meaningfully improved all balance measures by restoring performance to a level analogous to an individual 3 to 10 years younger: LOB = -2.0 +/- 0.3 (adjusted paired differences, P < .005 ANOVA); SST = 7.0 +/- 1.2 sec; and FBOS = 9.0 +/- 2.0% of foot length (P < .05). Strengthening increased ISOK by 1.1 +/- 0.1 Nm kg-1 (P < .005). There was no interaction between balance and strength training. Significant gains persisted after 6 months of Tai Chi, although there was some decrement.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Wolfson, L., Whipple, R., Derby, C., Judge, J., King, M., Amerman, P., et al. (1996). Balance and strength training in older adults: intervention gains and Tai Chi maintenance. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.1996.tb01433.x
Vancouver
Wolfson L, Whipple R, Derby C, Judge J, King M, Amerman P, et al. Balance and strength training in older adults: intervention gains and Tai Chi maintenance. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 1996. doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.1996.tb01433.x. PMID: 8617896.
BibTeX
@article{wolfson1996-8617896,
author = {Wolfson, L. and Whipple, R. and Derby, C. and Judge, J. and King, M. and Amerman, P. and Schmidt, J. and Smyers, D.},
title = {{Balance and strength training in older adults: intervention gains and Tai Chi maintenance}},
journal = {Journal of the American Geriatrics Society},
year = {1996},
doi = {10.1111/j.1532-5415.1996.tb01433.x},
pmid = {8617896},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.1996.tb01433.x}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 8 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Results and conclusions Balance training meaningfully improved all balance measures by restoring performance to a level analogous to an individual 3 to 10 years younger: LOB = -2.0 +/- 0.3 (adjusted paired differences, P < .005 ANOVA); SST = 7.0 +/- 1.2 sec; and FBOS = 9.0 +/- 2.0% of foot length (P < .05).
- Significant gains persisted after 6 months of Tai Chi, although there was some decrement.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Digital health →
Study details
- Effect size2.0%
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 74/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a randomised controlled trial. Scored zero for sample size because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 43 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 74 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of the American Geriatrics Society) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 11 / 12 | A randomised controlled trial (from PubMed type “Randomized Controlled Trial”) |
| Strength of evidence | 5 / 5 | Rated “high” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 1996 — older than 20 years, still counted |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 2 / 3 | Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (pubmed indexes it as a clinical or observational study) |
| Randomised / blinded | 2 / 2 | Randomised and blinded or placebo-controlled (as stated in the record) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 8617896) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 43 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 43 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 74 out of 100. |
| Total | 74 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Digital health tools
Also tagged “exercise-training”
125 studies in the library carry the topic tag “exercise-training”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 125 tagged studies.