
==== Front
BMJ Open
BMJ Open
bmjopen
bmjopen
BMJ Open
2044-6055
BMJ Publishing Group BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR

39117404
10.1136/bmjopen-2023-080550
bmjopen-2023-080550
Original Research
Geriatric Medicine
1698
1506
Perturbation-based balance training of older adults and effects on physiological, cognitive and sociopsychological factors: a secondary analysis from a randomised controlled trial with 12-month follow-up
https://twitter.com/JensEgNorgaard
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5256-6108
Nørgaard Jens Eg 12jens.noergaard@rn.dk

http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3632-5213
Andersen Stig 12lasa@rn.dk

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8641-3062
Ryg Jesper 34Jesper.Ryg@rsyd.dk

Andreasen Jane 567jaan@rn.dk

Oliveira Anderson de Souza Castelo 8oliveira@mp.aau.dk

http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1045-4738
Stevenson Andrew James Thomas 6ajts@hst.aau.dk

https://twitter.com/MB_Danielsen
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7431-5257
Danielsen Mathias Brix Brix 12maad@rn.dk

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3189-644X
Jorgensen Martin Gronbech 12mgj@rn.dk

1 Department of Geriatric Medicine, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark
2 Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg Universitet, Aalborg, Denmark
3 Department of Geriatric Medicine, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
4 Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
5 Department of Occupational Therapy and Physiotherapy, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark
6 Department of Health, Science and Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark
7 Aalborg Health and Rehabilitation Center, Aalborg Municipality, Aalborg, Denmark
8 Department of Materials and Production, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark
Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.

None declared.

DrMartin GronbechJorgensen; mgj@rn.dk
2024
7 8 2024
14 8 e08055004 10 2023
09 7 2024
Copyright © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

Abstract

Background

Perturbation-based balance training (PBT) has shown promising, although diverging, fall-preventive effects; however, the effects on important physical, cognitive and sociopsychological factors are currently unknown. The study aimed to evaluate these effects on PBT at three different time points (post-training, 6-months and 12-months) in community-dwelling older adults compared with regular treadmill walking.

Methods

This was a preplanned secondary analysis from a randomised, controlled trial performed in Aalborg, Denmark, between March 2021 and November 2022. Community-dwelling older adults aged ≥65 were randomly assigned to participate in four sessions (lasting 20 min each) of either PBT (intervention) or regular treadmill walking (control). All participants were assigned to four testing sessions: pretraining, post-training, 6-month follow-up and 12-month follow-up. At these sessions, physical, cognitive and sociopsychological measures were assessed.

Results

In total, 140 participants were randomly allocated to either the PBT or control group. Short-term (pretraining to post-training) between-group differences were seen for choice stepping reaction time (−49 ms, 95% CI −80 to −18), dual-task gait speed (0.05 m/s, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.09) favouring the PBT group. However, these improvements were not sustained at the 6-month and 12-month follow-up. No significant between-group differences were found in other physical, cognitive or sociopsychological factors.

Conclusions

This study showed that PBT, in the short term, improved choice stepping reaction time and dual-task gait speed among community-dwelling older adults. Yet, these improvements were not retained for 6- or 12-months. The healthy state of the study’s population may have imposed a ceiling effect limiting the ability to show any clinically relevant effects of PBT.NCT04733222

Trial registration number

NCT04733222.

Aged
Gait
Randomized Controlled Trial
The Department of Geriatric Medicine, Aalborg University Hospital, Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University N/A The study funders had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; or decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
==== Body
pmcSTRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS OF THIS STUDY

This randomised controlled trial was preregistered in ClinicalTrails.gov, a protocol was published, and it followed CONSORT statement.

Due to practical limitations and the nature of training interventions, the outcome assessor of these secondary outcomes and participants were not blinded for group allocation.

The study population was a convenience sample of low-risk older adults with no specific physical, cognitive or sociopsychological problems.

Introduction

Ageing leads to deteriorations in physical and cognitive functions, increasing the risk of falls and fall-related injuries, such as fractures.13 However, falls not only lead to physical but also psychological consequences, as falling has been associated with developing concerns about falling.4 These physical and cognitive consequences of falls collectively lead to disability and loss of independence, which greatly impact the quality of life of older adults.5 Additionally, society is substantially burdened by fall-related costs, accounting for approximately 1% (0.8% to 1.5%) of healthcare expenses in developed countries.6 Thus, effective and sustainable fall-preventive interventions are needed to improve the well-being of older adults and limit societal costs.7

Currently, physical exercise is considered the most effective fall-preventive intervention.8 A systematic review of 64 randomised, controlled trials on general physical exercise identified a 23% reduction in fall rates.9 Most of the studies in this review employed conventional training approaches targeting specific physical functions associated with fall risk such as muscle strength or balance.9 Thus, besides preventing falls, they also help maintain activities of daily life function which is important for preserving the independence and quality of life of older adults.10 11 However, indirectly targeting falls by improving risk factors may not be the most effective approach.9 Indeed, the well-established principle of task-specificity states that training paradigms are most effective when they closely simulate the desired task.1214 Among community-dwelling older adults, most falls are caused by slips and trips during walking.2 15 16 Hence, interventions emphasising rapid compensatory reactions following slips and trips may prove more effective in fall-prevention compared with conventional approaches.15 17

One such intervention is perturbation-based balance training (PBT), in which the participants are exposed to repeated, unexpected postural disturbances while wearing a body harness to ensure their safety.18 It is well documented that PBT leads to considerable reactive balance adaptations after even short exposures, which can be retained for up to a year in laboratory settings.1821 Yet, divergent effects of PBT on daily life falls have been reported, with some showing an approximate 50% decrease while others find no effects, including the primary analysis from the current study, which showed a non-significant decrease in fall rates of 22% (Incidence Rate Ratio 0.78, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.39).182224 Moreover, additional benefits of PBT on other physical, cognitive and sociopsychological factors are vastly unknown. Considering that the laboratory reactive balance adaptations are long-lasting, evaluating the long-term (> 6 months) maintenance of additional adaptations is of special interest. The long-term effects of PBT have previously been explored in patients with Parkinson’s disease and spinal cord injury2528 and short-term effects in community-dwelling older adults29 Therefore, this preplanned secondary analysis of a randomised, controlled trial with a 12-month follow-up aimed to evaluate the short-term and long-term effects of a four-session PBT intervention on physical (gait, static balance, choice stepping reaction time, lower extremity performance), cognitive (executive function) and sociopsychological (concerns about falling and quality of life) measures among community-dwelling older adults aged 65 years or older, compared with regular treadmill walking.

Methods

Trial design

This article reports secondary results from a parallel group (1:1 ratio), randomised, controlled trial with a 12-month follow-up. A trial protocol and statistical analysis plan have been preregistered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04733222), and a protocol has been published.30 The primary outcome was fall rates and these results have already been reported.31 There were no deviations from the protocol. The reporting of this article adheres to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) 2010 guidelines.32

Participants

Eligible participants had to be (1) 65 years or older, (2) community-dwelling and (3) able to walk without a walking aid. Individuals were excluded if they (1) had an unstable medical condition that prevents safe participation, (2) had a severe cognitive impairment (defined as a score of 8 or less on the Short Orientation-Memory-Concentration test), (3) were currently participating in another fall-preventive trial or (4) had any of the following self-reported conditions: orthopaedic surgery within the past 12-months, osteoporosis or history of osteoporosis-related fractures (low impact hip, spine and wrist fracture) or progressive neurological disease (eg, Parkinson, multiple sclerosis).

The participants were recruited through advertisements on local radio and national television spots. Testing and training sessions were conducted at a laboratory at Aalborg University (Department of Health, Science and Technology, Fredrik Bajers Vej 7A2-107, DK-9000, Aalborg, Denmark).

Interventions

All participants were assigned to four training sessions (see figure 1). The initial two sessions were conducted on the first day at the laboratory. A week later, the third training session was performed while the fourth served as a booster session 6 months after the third session.

Figure 1 The study design. Dark grey boxes show the flow of the PBT group. Light grey boxes show the flow of the control group. White boxes indicate that all participants were assigned. EQ5D, EuroQoL 5-dimensions, 5-levels; PBT, Perturbation-based balance training; s-FES, Short falls efficacy scale; SPPB, Short physical performance battery; TMT, Trial making test; TW, Treadmill walking.

The training interventions were performed on the same Woodway split-belt treadmill, moving uniformly (Split 70/157/ASK; Woodway, Weil am Rhein, Germany). Before training commencement, the preferred treadmill walking speed was determined by increasing and decreasing the belt speed until the upper and lower boundary of comfortable walking was identified. The preferred walking speed was then defined as the average of this upper and lower boundary.

Perturbation-based balance training (intervention)

A detailed description of the PBT protocol has been published elsewhere.30 In brief, participants allocated to the PBT group were exposed to 40 perturbations applied bilaterally at each session. The first session consisted only of slips, the second only trips while the third and the fourth had randomly mixed slips and trips. The timing (10–50 steps) and side (left or right) of the perturbations were randomised to enhance their unpredictability. The slips (backward loss of balance) were induced by a sudden forward acceleration resulting in a reversal in the belt movement direction at the heel strike. The trips (forward loss of balance) were provoked by an initial small deceleration followed by a larger backward acceleration at the mid-swing phase of the gait cycle. The perturbations were triggered by a heel contact placed under the sole of the left foot using the computer software Mr. Kick III (Knud Larsen, Department of Health, Science and Technology, Aalborg University, Denmark).

The perturbation intensity depended on the preferred walking speed and was divided into five levels with progressively increasing duration for the slips and acceleration for the trips. After every fourth perturbation, participants rated the perceived anxiety and difficulty of the previous perturbations on a scale from 1 to 5, with a higher score indicating higher perceived anxiety and difficulty. The intensity was increased if three criteria were fulfilled: (1) the combined perceived anxiety and difficulty were rated four or less, (2) the participant successfully recovered from the four prior perturbations and (3) the participant was willing to increase the difficulty. If any criteria were violated, the training intensity would remain at the highest tolerable level.

Treadmill walking training (control)

Participants allocated to the treadmill walking group walked for 20 min at their preferred walking speed, matching the time spent on the treadmill by the PBT group.

Outcomes

This study reports preplanned secondary outcomes, including physical, cognitive and sociopsychological measures collected at the pretraining, post-training, 6-month follow-up and 12-month follow-up test (see figure 1). All outcomes were assessed by the same researcher, who was not blinded for group allocation. A detailed description of the tests and the instructions provided is available in online supplemental material 1.

The physical outcomes are all associated with fall risk and include single and dual-task gait, single and dual-task static balance, choice stepping reaction time and lower extremity performance.3338 The gait assessment consisted of three single-task and three dual-task trials of 8 m walking at a preferred walking speed, with the middle 6 m timed using a handheld stopwatch.37 39 40 As the dual-task, the participants were instructed to count backwards in threes from a random three-digit number. No instructions to either prioritise the walking or counting task were provided. The average gait speed of the three trials was used in the analyses. The balance assessment was conducted on a Wii balance board using the FysioMeter software (FysioMeter, V.1.2.1.4, Denmark).4143 Participants were instructed to stand as still as possible for 30 s, three times as a single-task and three times as a dual-task. The dual-task involved naming items from specific grocery store sections (dairy, produce and butchery), with no instruction to focus on the balance or cognitive task. The average centre of pressure displacement area and speed from the three trials were used in the analysis. The choice stepping reaction test was also conducted using the Wii balance board and involved reacting as fast as possible to visual clues given on a computer screen by tapping the foot on the correct side of the Wii balance board.34 44 Seven reactions were collected, and the average reaction time of the initial six was used in the analyses. The Short Physical Performance Battery was used to evaluate lower extremity performance and involved three elements: (1) balance with three different foot positions (side-by-side, semitandem and tandem), (2) two 4 m walks and (3) five sit-to-stands.36 45 A score was calculated (range: 0–12; higher score indicates better performance) and used in the analyses. Further, the time used in the five sit-to-stands was also analysed as a measure of functional strength.46

Cognitive function, known as executive function, was evaluated using the trail making test (TMT) part A and part B.47 48 Participants sequentially connected numbers (part A) or alternating numbers and letters (part B). Part A assessed visual search, motor speed skills and attention while part B evaluated working memory and task shifting.48 The time to complete part B minus part A (ΔTMT) was used in the analyses.49 50

Sociopsychological outcomes included concerns about falling and health-related quality of life. The concerns about falling were evaluated using the Short Falls Efficacy Scale-International, and the score was used in the analyses (range: 7–28; a higher score indicates higher concern).51 Moreover, the health-related quality of life was assessed using EuroQoL 5-dimensions, 5-levels (EQ-5D-5L).52 53 The EQ-5D-5L index score (range: −1 to 1; higher index indicates better quality of life) and Visual Analogue Scale score (range: 0–100; higher score indicates better quality of life) were used in the analyses.

Sample size

The sample size was calculated based on an expected decrease in the study’s primary outcome in fall rates. Therefore, the sample size calculation was based on Poisson’s regression model in G*Power (V.3.1.9.4, University of Kiel, Kiel, German). An expected 50% effect size from a base fall rate of 0.85 with an 80% power and 5% significance level necessitated 70 participants in each group, assuming a 20% drop-out.

Randomisation

Immediately after pretraining assessments, participants were allocated to either the PBT or control group using a blocked randomisation module generated in STATA and uploaded in REDCap. The module was created by research staff not involved in any other trial activities. Random block sizes of 2, 4, 6 and 8 were used to conceal the allocation sequence. The nature of training interventions and practical limitations led to neither the participant nor the outcome assessor being blinded for group allocation.

Statistical methods

All statistical analyses were conducted following the preregistered statistical analysis plan in collaboration with an external biostatistician.30 The primary statistical analyses were performed following the intention-to-treat principle. A per-protocol analysis was conducted for participants who completed at least 75% of the intervention. The analyses were conducted in STATA (V.17.0, StataCorp), and p values of <0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Demographic data are presented as a mean and SD, median and IQR, or number and percentage, where appropriate. A linear mixed-effects regression model with the Restricted Maximum Likelihood estimation procedure was used to evaluate the between-group differences in the physical, cognitive and sociopsychological measures. In the model, group and time were set as fixed and included together with the interaction term. Record ID was set as a random effect. The results will be presented as estimates of the between-group differences of the within-group changes (pretraining to post-training, pretraining to 6 months, and pretraining to 12 months). Model assumptions were checked by inspection of residual plots, and deviations will be mentioned, but will not affect the analysis. Further, missing data were appraised missing at random; thus, multiple imputations were not conducted as it does not add any benefits to the linear mixed-effects model.54 We did not correct for multiple adjustments; thus, the results should be interpreted as explorative.55

Patient and public involvement

Patients or the public were not involved in the design, or conduct, or reporting, or dissemination plans of our research.

Results

Participant flow

Of the 199 screened older adults, 140 were enrolled and randomised to either the PBT or control group between March and November 2021 (see figure 2). The baseline characteristics of both groups can be found in table 1. Loss to follow-up was 4 (6%) and 3 (4%) at the post-training test, 6 (9%) and 11 (16%) at the 26-week follow-up, and 10 (14%) and 16 (23%) at the 52-week follow-up in the PBT and control group, respectively. At least one data point was missing for 13 (19%) in the PBT group and 18 (26%) in the control group. There were similar reasons for drop-out and demographic characteristics between groups among participants with missing data (see online supplemental material 2). The PBT group had a 90% adherence to training while the control group completed 93% of the assigned sessions. Moreover, 90% of the PBT group and 97% of the control group completed at least 75% of the intervention, which was the limit for being included in the per-protocol analyses.

Figure 2 CONSORT flow chart of the participant flow through the present study. *Per-protocol analysis only included participants that completed at least 75% (three of four sessions) of the assigned intervention.

Table 1 Baseline characteristics of participants

	PBT group (n=70)	Control group (n=70)	
Age (years), mean (SD)	72.7 (4.7)	72.0 (4.7)	
Sex, no. female (%)	41 (59)	38 (54)	
Frailty,* median (IQR)	2 (1–3)	2 (1–3)	
Living arrangement, no. living alone (%)	23 (33)	24 (34)	
Daily activity level, sitting down† (hours)	4 (6)	6 (9)	
Medication, median (IQR)	2 (0–4)	3 (0–4)	
Function of daily activities,‡ median (IQR)	2 (1–2)	2 (1–2)	
Fall within the past 12 months, no. fall (%)	28 (40)	29 (41)	
Cognition,§ median (IQR)	26 (24–28)	26 (24–28)	
Physical function,¶ median (IQR)	12 (11–12)	12 (11–12)	
Habitual gait speed (m/s), mean (SD)	1.3 (0.2)	1.3 (0.2)	
Executive function,** median (IQR)	47.3 (26.1–63.5)	40.7 (29.1–61.8)	
* Tilburg Frailty indicator (score 0–15; lower is better).

† International Physical Activity Questionnaire—time spent sitting down on average per day.

‡ The Vulnerable Elderly-13 Survey (score 0–10; lower is better).

§ The Short Orientation-Memory-Concentration Test (score 0–28; higher is better).

¶ The Short Physical Performance Battery (0–12; higher is better).

** Trail Making Test part A subtracted from part B (lower score implied better performance).

PBT, perturbation-based balance training

Outcomes and estimation

All results from the unadjusted model regarding the physical, cognitive and sociopsychological measures are presented in online supplemental table 1. Multiple within-group differences were found; however, this section only contains the results of the between-group differences. Among the physical functions, a significant difference from the pre-training to post-training test favouring the PBT group was found in choice stepping reaction time (−49 ms, 95% CI −80 to −18) and dual-task gait speed (0.05 m/s, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.09). However, none of these improvements were retained for the 6- or 12-months follow-up. There were no significant between-group differences in any of the other physical, cognitive or sociopsychological factors.

Ancillary analyses

When adjusting for age, sex and previous falls, the analyses identified significant changes from the pre-training to post-training test favouring the PBT group in single-task gait speed (0.03 m/s, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.06) and five sit-to-stands (−0.54 s, 95% CI −0.97 to −0.01). Otherwise, the analyses led to similar results as the unadjusted model. Lastly, analysing the data using a per-protocol approach did not lead to different estimates than the intention-to-treat analyses. All results of the sensitivity analyses can be found in online supplemental material 3.

Discussion

This secondary analysis from a randomised, controlled trial showed that four sessions of treadmill PBT did not lead to long-term (≥6 months) improvements in the evaluated physical, cognitive or sociopsychological measures. However, there was a significant short-term improvement from the pretraining to post-training test in choice stepping reaction time and dual-task gait speed favouring the PBT group.

Short-term effects of PBT

PBT led to significantly greater improvements in the choice stepping reaction time from pretraining to post-training than regular treadmill walking (−49 ms, 95% CI −80 to −18). Choice stepping reaction time is a composite measure of fall risk that evaluates the ability to make quick and appropriate voluntary stepping responses to visual cues.34 The improvement found in our study contrasts with,56 which showed that three slip and trip overground walkway PBT sessions had no beneficial effects on the choice stepping reaction time.56 This discrepancy may be due to Okubo et al having four stepping options in the reaction test while our test only had two.56 This may lead to the performance being more reliant on executive functions, which this and previous PBT studies have shown limited effects on.57 However, in line with our results, Kurz et al showed treadmill PBT significantly improved voluntary step execution onto one of two targets triggered by a somatosensory cue.58 This improvement in voluntary step execution was achieved by a faster step initiation time which implies an enhanced central processing speed.58 Furthermore, other PBT studies have also reported significant improvements in stepping reactions following either somatosensory or auditory cues.5961 Our study, however, is the first to show that PBT improves voluntary stepping performance to visual cues. Collectively, PBT may induce adaptations within the central nervous system that benefit gait adaptability, which is important in fall prevention.62 Still, while there is no established minimally clinically important difference regarding choice stepping reaction time, the 7% improvement after PBT is smaller than the 13% difference previously found between fallers and non-fallers.34

Our results also identified significant improvements from the pretraining to post-training test favouring PBT in dual-task gait speed (0.05 m/s, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.09); yet, these improvements were below the limit of minimal clinically important difference (gait speed: 0.10 m/s).63 64 No other physical and cognitive measures showed a between-group difference following PBT. Supporting these findings, studies applying multidirectional perturbations within 3–5 sessions showed no improvements in physical measures of strength, static balance and gait.23 56 65 Likewise, a single session of 96 waist pull perturbations on a treadmill did not lead to changes in the executive function evaluated using the TMT.57 However, in contrast to our results, studies including longer training intervention (≥4 weeks) in community-dwelling older adults and Parkinson’s patients have been able to show improvements in various physical, cognitive and sociopsychological measures.25 27 28 In summary, our results indicate that adaptations to PBT interventions are highly task-specific, but some research may imply that higher dosages could lead to better transfer effects.13 14 18

Lastly, the PBT intervention failed to show significant between-group differences in the sociopsychological measures. However, close-to-perfect concerns about falling and quality of life scores at pretraining enforced a ceiling effect leaving almost no room for improvement. Therefore, future studies should evaluate these parameters in participants exposed to substantial concerns about falling and low quality of life.

Long-term effects of PBT

A key component of PBT is the well-documented long-term retention of reactive balance adaptations following even small training dosages.1820 Improvements in choice stepping reaction time must also be retained throughout the detraining period to be relevant. While choice stepping reaction time in the PBT group remained significantly lower at the 6 and 12 months follow-up compared with the pretraining test, these improvements were not significantly different from the control group (see online supplemental table 1). Thus, there were no long-term effects of PBT on any physical, cognitive or sociopsychological measures. These results align with our primary findings that PBT did not lead to a significant decrease in daily life fall rate.31 Our findings also support the current detraining literature, which points to a decline in physical performance following training cessation in older adults.6668

Practical implications

While the previously published results of the primary outcome paper showed a sustained improvement in reactive balance control over 12 months in laboratory settings (−63% laboratory fall rate at the 12-month follow-up), we only identified a partial transfer of adaptations to daily life (a nonsignificant 22% decrease in fall rates).31 Moreover, the findings reported in this paper also show that PBT may have limited effects on other important physical, cognitive and sociopsychological factors. This indicates that PBT should not be regarded as a single intervention but as part of a multicomponent training programme. Considering the task-specificity of training adaptations, it is not surprising that multicomponent training programmes have proven most effective in improving overall physical and cognitive functions.69 70 It has recently been recommended that fall preventive training programmes should include balance challenging and functional exercises with additional tai chi and progressive strength training.7 Adding PBT to multicomponent training programmes could potentially improve the fall preventive effect with only slightly higher training dosages.13 18 62 However, this remains speculative until studies have shown the effectiveness of such multicomponent interventions.

Limitations

The results of this study should be interpreted considering the study’s limitations. First, due to practical limitations and the nature of training interventions, the outcome assessor of these secondary outcomes and participants were not blinded for group allocation. Second, participants were convenience sampled, low-risk older adults with no specific physical, cognitive or sociopsychological problems. They were, therefore, not the targeted population for fall preventive training according to the recent world guidelines of fall prevention and management in older adults.7 Moreover, this population may have a limited potential for improvement, possibly explaining the lack of effect. Future PBT studies should investigate a frailer population to evaluate the potential effect among those prone to fall-related injuries. Finally, we did not correct for multiple comparisons, which may have led to false positive results due to mass significance; thus, the results should be seen as explorative only.

Conclusion

Secondary analyses from a randomised controlled trial showed that PBT led to short-term improvements in choice stepping reaction time and dual-task walking speed. However, these improvements were not retained at the 6 or 12 months follow-up tests. Moreover, PBT did not cause clinically important improvements in the other evaluated physical, cognitive or sociopsychological measures. These findings underline that adaptations to physical exercise are task-specific. However, the healthy state of the study’s population may have imposed a ceiling effect limiting the ability to show any beneficial effects. Further studies adding PBT to multicomponent training programmes and studies on more frail older adults with a greater potential for improvements are needed.

supplementary material

10.1136/bmjopen-2023-080550 online supplemental material 1

10.1136/bmjopen-2023-080550 online supplemental material 2

10.1136/bmjopen-2023-080550 online supplemental material 3

10.1136/bmjopen-2023-080550 online supplemental table 1

Acknowledgements

We thank all the volunteering participants for committing to making this study possible. Further, we would like to thank Statistian Regitze Gyldenholm Skals for helping in analysing the data.

Data availability statement

Data are available on reasonable request.

Review Process File
7 8 2024

Funding: The Department of Geriatric Medicine, Aalborg University Hospital, Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University and Aalborg Municipality funded the study (grant no. N/A).

Prepublication history and additional supplemental material for this paper are available online. To view these files, please visit the journal online (https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-080550).

Provenance and peer review: Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Patient consent for publication: Consent obtained directly from patient(s).

Ethics approval: This study involves human participants and the study was performed following the Declaration of Helsinki. North Denmark Region Committee on Human Research Ethics (N-20200089) and the Danish Data Protection Agency (2021-014) approved the study. All participants gave written informed consent before enrolment. Participants gave informed consent to participate in the study before taking part.

Data availability free text: Deidentified trial results data will be available on reasonable request for non-commercial use up to 5 years after the publication of the trial findings. The available data will include (but is not limited to) deidentified individual participant data, the study protocol, the Statistical Analysis Plan (SAP), informed consent forms and analytic codes used. Requests for access will be reviewed by a designated data access committee to ensure they are for non-commercial, scientific purposes and that requesters agree to abide by data protection protocols. Data-sharing agreements will be required. Please note that the data-sharing plan outlined in the trial registration is outdated and cannot be changed.

Patient and public involvement: Patients and/or the public were not involved in the design, or conduct, or reporting, or dissemination plans of this research.
==== Refs
References

1 Manini T Development of physical disability in older adults CAS 2011 4 184 91 10.2174/1874609811104030184
2 Peel NM Peel NM Epidemiology of falls in older age Can J Aging 2011 30 7 19 10.1017/S071498081000070X 21401978
3 London AJ Cigolle CT Ha J et al The epidemiologic data on falls, 1998-2010: more older Americans report falling JAMA Intern Med 2015 175 443 5 10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.7533 25599461
4 Friedman SM Munoz B West SK et al Falls and fear of falling: which comes first? A longitudinal prediction model suggests strategies for primary and secondary prevention J Am Geriatr Soc 2002 50 1329 35 10.1046/j.1532-5415.2002.50352.x 12164987
5 Stenhagen M Ekström H Nordell E et al Accidental falls, health-related quality of life and life satisfaction: a prospective study of the general elderly population Arch Gerontol Geriatr 2014 58 95 100 10.1016/j.archger.2013.07.006 23993268
6 Heinrich S Rapp K Rissmann U et al Cost of falls in old age: a systematic review Osteoporos Int 2010 21 891 902 10.1007/s00198-009-1100-1 19924496
7 Montero-Odasso M van der Velde N Martin FC et al World guidelines for falls prevention and management for older adults: a global initiative Age Ageing 2022 51 1 36 10.1093/ageing/afac205
8 Falck RS Davis JC Best JR et al Impact of exercise training on physical and cognitive function among older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis Neurobiol Aging 2019 79 119 30 10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2019.03.007 31051329
9 Sherrington C Fairhall N Kwok W et al Evidence on physical activity and falls prevention for people aged 65+ years: systematic review to inform the WHO guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behaviour Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2020 17 1 9 10.1186/s12966-020-01041-3 31898547
10 Lee H-C Chang K-C Tsauo J-Y et al Effects of a multifactorial fall prevention program on fall incidence and physical function in community-dwelling older adults with risk of falls Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2013 94 606 15 10.1016/j.apmr.2012.11.037 23220343
11 Chou CH Hwang CL Wu YT Effect of exercise on physical function, daily living activities, and quality of life in the frail older adults: a meta-analysis Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2012 93 237 44 10.1016/j.apmr.2011.08.042 22289232
12 Buford TW Anton SD Clark DJ et al Optimizing the benefits of exercise on physical function in older adults PM R 2014 6 528 43 10.1016/j.pmrj.2013.11.009 24361365
13 Grabiner MD Crenshaw JR Hurt CP et al Exercise-based fall prevention: can you be a bit more specific? Exerc Sport Sci Rev 2014 42 161 8 10.1249/JES.0000000000000023 25062002
14 Giboin LS Gruber M Kramer A Task-specificity of balance training Hum Mov Sci 2015 44 22 31 10.1016/j.humov.2015.08.012 26298214
15 Berg WP Alessio HM Mills EM et al Circumstances and consequences of falls in independent community-dwelling older adults Age Ageing 1997 26 261 8 10.1093/ageing/26.4.261 9271288
16 Talbot LA Musiol RJ Witham EK et al Falls in young, middle-aged and older community dwelling adults: perceived cause, environmental factors and injury BMC Public Health 2005 5 1 9 10.1186/1471-2458-5-86 15627405
17 Luukinen H Herala M Koski K et al Fracture risk associated with a fall according to type of fall among the elderly Osteoporos Int 2000 11 631 4 10.1007/s001980070086 11069199
18 McCrum C Bhatt TS Gerards MHG et al Perturbation-based balance training: principles, mechanisms and implementation in clinical practice Front Sports Act Living 2022 4 1015394 10.3389/fspor.2022.1015394 36275443
19 Pai Y-C Yang F Bhatt T et al Learning from laboratory-induced falling: long-term motor retention among older adults Age (Dordr) 2014 36 1367 76 10.1007/s11357-014-9640-5
20 Epro G Mierau A McCrum C et al Retention of gait stability improvements over 1.5 years in older adults: effects of perturbation exposure and triceps surae neuromuscular exercise J Neurophysiol 2018 119 2229 40 10.1152/jn.00513.2017 29537914
21 Lee A Bhatt T Liu X et al Can treadmill slip-perturbation training reduce longer-term fall risk upon overground slip exposure? J Appl Biomech 2020 36 298 306 10.1123/jab.2019-0211 32843581
22 Pai Y-C Bhatt T Yang F et al Perturbation training can reduce community-dwelling older adults’ annual fall risk: a randomized controlled trial J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2014 69 1586 94 10.1093/gerona/glu087 24966227
23 Lurie JD Zagaria AB Ellis L et al Surface perturbation training to prevent falls in older adults: a highly pragmatic, randomized controlled trial Phys Ther 2020 100 1153 62 10.1093/ptj/pzaa023 31998949
24 Gerards MHG McCrum C Mansfield A et al Perturbation-based balance training for falls reduction among older adults: current evidence and implications for clinical practice Geriatr Gerontol Int 2017 17 2294 303 10.1111/ggi.13082 28621015
25 Shen X Mak MKY Technology-assisted balance and gait training reduces falls in patients with Parkinson’s disease: a randomized controlled trial with 12-month follow-up Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2015 29 103 11 10.1177/1545968314537559 24961993
26 Unger J Chan K Lee JW et al The effect of perturbation-based balance training and conventional intensive balance training on reactive stepping ability in individuals with incomplete spinal cord injury or disease: a randomized clinical trial Front Neurol 2021 12 620367 10.3389/fneur.2021.620367 33603710
27 Steib S Klamroth S Gaßner H et al Perturbation during treadmill training improves dynamic balance and gait in Parkinson’s disease: a single-blind randomized controlled pilot trial Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2017 31 758 68 10.1177/1545968317721976 28758519
28 Smania N Corato E Tinazzi M et al Effect of balance training on postural instability in patients with idiopathic Parkinson’s disease Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2010 24 826 34 10.1177/1545968310376057 21045119
29 Rieger MM Papegaaij S Steenbrink F et al Effects of perturbation-based treadmill training on balance performance, daily life gait, and falls in older adults: REACT randomized controlled trial Phys Ther 2024 104 pzad136 10.1093/ptj/pzad136 37805994
30 Nørgaard JE Andersen S Ryg J et al Effects of treadmill slip and trip perturbation-based balance training on falls in community-dwelling older adults (STABILITY): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial BMJ Open 2022 12 e052492 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-052492
31 Nørgaard JE Andersen S Ryg J et al Effect of treadmill perturbation-based balance training on fall rates in community-dwelling older adults: a randomized clinical trial JAMA Netw Open 2023 6 e238422 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.8422 37079305
32 Schulz KF Altman DG Moher D et al CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials BMC Med 2010 8 18 10.1186/1741-7015-8-18 20334633
33 Muir-Hunter SW Wittwer JE Dual-task testing to predict falls in community-dwelling older adults: a systematic review Physiotherapy 2016 102 29 40 10.1016/j.physio.2015.04.011 26390824
34 Lord SR Fitzpatrick RC Choice stepping reaction time: a composite measure of falls risk in older people J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2001 56 M627 32 10.1093/gerona/56.10.m627 11584035
35 Johansson J Nordström A Gustafson Y et al Increased postural sway during quiet stance as a risk factor for prospective falls in community-dwelling elderly individuals Age Ageing 2017 46 964 70 10.1093/ageing/afx083 28531243
36 Veronese N Bolzetta F Toffanello ED et al Association between short physical performance battery and falls in older people: the progetto Veneto anziani study Rejuvenation Res 2014 17 276 84 10.1089/rej.2013.1491 24387140
37 Cullen S Montero-Odasso M Bherer L et al Guidelines for gait assessments in the Canadian consortium on neurodegeneration in aging (CCNA) Can Geriatr J 2018 21 157 65 10.5770/cgj.21.298 29977431
38 Montero-Odasso M Almeida QJ Bherer L et al Consensus on shared measures of mobility and cognition: from the Canadian consortium on neurodegeneration in aging (CCNA) J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2019 74 897 909 10.1093/gerona/gly148 30101279
39 Montero-Odasso M Sarquis-Adamson Y Kamkar N et al Dual-task gait speed assessments with an electronic walkway and a stopwatch in older adults. a reliability study Exp Gerontol 2020 142 111102 10.1016/j.exger.2020.111102 33017671
40 Lyons JG Heeren T Stuver SO et al Assessing the agreement between 3-meter and 6-meter walk tests in 136 community-dwelling older adults J Aging Health 2015 27 594 605 10.1177/0898264314556987 25376604
41 Clark RA Mentiplay BF Pua Y-H et al Reliability and validity of the Wii Balance Board for assessment of standing balance: a systematic review Gait Posture 2018 61 40 54 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2017.12.022 29304510
42 Jorgensen MG Laessoe U Hendriksen C et al Intra-rater reproducibility and validity of Nintendo Wii balance testing in community-dwelling older adults Eur Geriatr Med 2013 4 S87 10.1016/j.eurger.2013.07.284
43 Bonnechère B Van Hove O Jansen B et al Validation of the Wii Balance Board to assess static balance during dual-task activity in healthy subjects Med Novel Technol Devices 2019 1 100003 10.1016/j.medntd.2019.100003
44 Jorgensen MG Paramanathan S Ryg J et al Novel use of the Nintendo Wii board as a measure of reaction time: a study of reproducibility in older and younger adults BMC Geriatr 2015 15 80 10.1186/s12877-015-0080-6 26155934
45 Freire AN Guerra RO Alvarado B et al Validity and reliability of the short physical performance battery in two diverse older adult populations in Quebec and Brazil J Aging Health 2012 24 863 78 10.1177/0898264312438551 22422762
46 Goldberg A Chavis M Watkins J et al The five-times-sit-to-stand test: validity, reliability and detectable change in older females Aging Clin Exp Res 2012 24 339 44 10.1007/BF03325265 23238309
47 Gullickson T Review of a compendium of neuropsychological tests: administration, norms, and commentary Contemp Psychol 1992 37 385 10.1037/032065
48 Montero-odasso M Falls and Cognition in Older Persons Cham Springer International Publishing 2020 Available 10.1007/978-3-030-24233-6
49 Delbaere K Close JCT Heim J et al A multifactorial approach to understanding fall risk in older people J Am Geriatr Soc 2010 58 1679 85 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2010.03017.x 20863327
50 Lezak M Howieson D Loring D Neuropsychological Assessment. 4th Ed New York Oxford University Press, inc 2004
51 Marques-Vieira CMA Sousa LMM Severino S et al Cross-cultural validation of the falls efficacy scale international in elderly: systematic literature review J Clin Gerontol Geriatr 2016 7 72 6 10.1016/j.jcgg.2015.12.002
52 Sørensen J Davidsen M Gudex C et al Danish EQ-5D population norms Scand J Public Health 2009 37 467 74 10.1177/1403494809105286 19535407
53 Feng Y-S Kohlmann T Janssen MF et al Psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L: a systematic review of the literature Qual Life Res 2021 30 647 73 10.1007/s11136-020-02688-y 33284428
54 Peters SAE Bots ML den Ruijter HM et al Multiple imputation of missing repeated outcome measurements did not add to linear mixed-effects models J Clin Epidemiol 2012 65 686 95 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.11.012 22459429
55 Rothman KJ No adjustments are needed for multiple comparisons Epidemiology (Sunnyvale) 1990 1 43 6 10.1097/00001648-199001000-00010
56 Okubo Y Sturnieks DL Brodie MA et al Effect of reactive balance training involving repeated slips and trips on balance recovery among older adults: a blinded randomized controlled trial J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2019 74 1489 96 10.1093/gerona/glz021 30721985
57 Martelli D Vashista V Micera S et al Direction-dependent adaptation of dynamic gait stability following Waist-Pull Perturbations IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2016 24 1304 13 10.1109/TNSRE.2015.2500100 26625418
58 Kurz I Gimmon Y Shapiro A et al Unexpected perturbations training improves balance control and voluntary stepping times in older adults - a double blind randomized control trial BMC Geriatr 2016 16 58 10.1186/s12877-016-0223-4 26944706
59 Mansfield A Peters AL Liu BA et al Effect of a perturbation-based balance training program on compensatory stepping and grasping reactions in older adults: a randomized controlled trial Phys Ther 2010 90 476 91 10.2522/ptj.20090070 20167644
60 Parijat P Lockhart TE Effects of moveable platform training in preventing slip-induced falls in older adults Ann Biomed Eng 2012 40 1111 21 10.1007/s10439-011-0477-0 22134467
61 Shimada H Obuchi S Furuna T et al New intervention program for preventing falls among frail elderly people: the effects of perturbed walking exercise using a bilateral separated treadmill Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2004 83 493 9 10.1097/01.phm.0000130025.54168.91 15213472
62 Nørgaard JE Jorgensen MG Ryg J et al Effects of gait adaptability training on falls and fall-related fractures in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis Age Ageing 2021 50 1914 24 10.1093/ageing/afab105 34120163
63 Kwon S Perera S Pahor M et al What is a meaningful change in physical performance? Findings from a clinical trial in older adults (the LIFE-P study) J Nutr Health Aging 2009 13 538 44 10.1007/s12603-009-0104-z 19536422
64 Chui K Hood E Klima D Meaningful change in walking speed Top Geriatr Rehabil 2012 28 97 103 10.1097/TGR.0b013e3182510195
65 Allin LJ Brolinson PG Beach BM et al Perturbation-based balance training targeting both slip- and trip-induced falls among older adults: a randomized controlled trial BMC Geriatr 2020 20 205 10.1186/s12877-020-01605-9 32532221
66 Blasco-Lafarga C Cordellat A Forte A et al Short and long-term trainability in older adults: training and detraining following two years of multicomponent cognitive—physical exercise training Int J Environ Res Public Health 2020 17 5984 10.3390/ijerph17165984 32824709
67 Fernández‐García ÁI Gómez‐Cabello A Gómez‐Bruton A et al Effects of multicomponent training and detraining on the fitness of older adults with or at risk of frailty: results of a 10‐month quasi‐experimental study Eur J Sport Sci 2023 23 1696 709 10.1080/17461391.2022.2104657 35876120
68 Vogler CM Menant JC Sherrington C et al Evidence of detraining after 12-week home-based exercise programs designed to reduce fall-risk factors in older people recently discharged from hospital Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2012 93 1685 91 10.1016/j.apmr.2012.03.033 22504154
69 Giné-Garriga M Roqué-Fíguls M Coll-Planas L et al Physical exercise interventions for improving performance-based measures of physical function in community-dwelling frail older adults Med Sci Sports Exerc 2014 46 134 10.1249/01.mss.0000493577.59267.d5
70 Schoene D Valenzuela T Lord SR et al The effect of interactive cognitive-motor training in reducing fall risk in older people: a systematic review BMC Geriatr 2014 14 107 10.1186/1471-2318-14-107 25240384
