Abstract
Four databases were searched and yielded 1587 citations. Two reviewers independently determined study eligibility, rated risk of bias, appraised methodological quality of studies, and resolved discordance by consensus. A total of 28 studies examining 2113 participants met inclusion criteria; 25 studies were suitable for meta-analyses. Four categories of exercise were identified using the ProFaNE taxonomy. After removing studies with high risk of bias and sorting them into intervention sub-types, we were able to sufficiently reduce the heterogeneity. The standardized mean difference (SMD) favored multicomponent exercise for mobility (- 0.56, 95% CI [- 0.81, - 0.32], p =0.06, I2= 51%); balance (0.50, 95% CI [0.27, 0.74], p =0.28, I2= 21%); and self-reported measures of functioning (- 0.69, 95% CI [- 1.04, - 0.34], p =0.02, I2= 61%). Trials were judged at low or unclear risk of selection bias, indicating inadequate reporting and at high risk of performance bias due to lack of participant blinding. The mean methodological quality rating of the studies was 63.5% indicating moderate quality. A multicomponent exercise program of high-speed training combined with simulated functional tasks is promising to enhance functional outcomes. Due to substantial clinical heterogeneity of the target groups and specific demands of exercise modes, it is unclear which exercise program is optimal.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
