提高老年人平衡能力的感知运动和本体感觉运动项目:系统回顾与荟萃分析。

IF 1.8 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL European Journal of Translational Myology Pub Date : 2024-01-11 DOI:10.4081/ejtm.2024.12010
Silvo Pšeničnik Sluga, Ziga Kozinc
{"title":"提高老年人平衡能力的感知运动和本体感觉运动项目:系统回顾与荟萃分析。","authors":"Silvo Pšeničnik Sluga, Ziga Kozinc","doi":"10.4081/ejtm.2024.12010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The primary aim of this study was to systematically review and meta-analyze the impact of sensorimotor and proprioceptive exercises on balance in older adults. We also sought to define how researchers describe proprioceptive and sensory-motor training and their respective protocols. The review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines, with searches performed in March 2023. Both authors carried out independent searches using the PubMed and PEDro databases. From a total of 320 identified records, 12 studies were deemed eligible for meta-analysis after screening and removal of duplicates. The average PEDro score was 5.11 ± 1.11 indicating overall fair quality of studies.  Common outcome measures included the Berg balance scale, Timed up and go test, Tinetti balance scale, Functional reach test and various single-leg stance tests. All outcomes were significantly improved by the interventions (standard mean difference = 0.65 - 1.29), with little difference between proprioceptive and sensorimotor training. However, the quality of evidence ranged from \"very low\" to \"low\" based on GRADE guidelines, suggesting further high-quality studies are needed. This review underscores the potential benefits of sensorimotor and proprioceptive exercises for enhancing balance in older adults, while also highlighting the ambiguity and inconsistency regarding the usage of the terms proprioceptive and sensorimotor training.</p>","PeriodicalId":46459,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Translational Myology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11017176/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sensorimotor and proprioceptive exercise programs to improve balance in older adults: a systematic review with meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Silvo Pšeničnik Sluga, Ziga Kozinc\",\"doi\":\"10.4081/ejtm.2024.12010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The primary aim of this study was to systematically review and meta-analyze the impact of sensorimotor and proprioceptive exercises on balance in older adults. We also sought to define how researchers describe proprioceptive and sensory-motor training and their respective protocols. The review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines, with searches performed in March 2023. Both authors carried out independent searches using the PubMed and PEDro databases. From a total of 320 identified records, 12 studies were deemed eligible for meta-analysis after screening and removal of duplicates. The average PEDro score was 5.11 ± 1.11 indicating overall fair quality of studies.  Common outcome measures included the Berg balance scale, Timed up and go test, Tinetti balance scale, Functional reach test and various single-leg stance tests. All outcomes were significantly improved by the interventions (standard mean difference = 0.65 - 1.29), with little difference between proprioceptive and sensorimotor training. However, the quality of evidence ranged from \\\"very low\\\" to \\\"low\\\" based on GRADE guidelines, suggesting further high-quality studies are needed. This review underscores the potential benefits of sensorimotor and proprioceptive exercises for enhancing balance in older adults, while also highlighting the ambiguity and inconsistency regarding the usage of the terms proprioceptive and sensorimotor training.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46459,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Translational Myology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11017176/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Translational Myology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4081/ejtm.2024.12010\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Translational Myology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4081/ejtm.2024.12010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究的主要目的是系统回顾和元分析感觉运动和本体感觉训练对老年人平衡能力的影响。我们还试图确定研究人员如何描述本体感觉和感觉运动训练及其各自的方案。综述按照 PRISMA 指南进行,检索时间为 2023 年 3 月。两位作者使用 PubMed 和 PEDro 数据库进行了独立检索。在总共 320 条已确认的记录中,经过筛选和去除重复内容后,有 12 项研究被认为符合荟萃分析的条件。PEDro 平均得分为 5.11 ± 1.11,表明研究的总体质量尚可。 常见的结果测量包括伯格平衡量表、计时起立和走动测试、蒂内蒂平衡量表、功能性伸展测试和各种单腿站立测试。所有结果都在干预措施的作用下得到了明显改善(标准平均差 = 0.65 - 1.29),本体感觉和感觉运动训练之间的差异很小。然而,根据 GRADE 指南,证据质量从 "很低 "到 "低 "不等,这表明还需要进一步的高质量研究。本综述强调了感觉运动和本体运动训练对增强老年人平衡能力的潜在益处,同时也强调了本体感觉和感觉运动训练这两个术语在使用上的模糊性和不一致性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Sensorimotor and proprioceptive exercise programs to improve balance in older adults: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

The primary aim of this study was to systematically review and meta-analyze the impact of sensorimotor and proprioceptive exercises on balance in older adults. We also sought to define how researchers describe proprioceptive and sensory-motor training and their respective protocols. The review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines, with searches performed in March 2023. Both authors carried out independent searches using the PubMed and PEDro databases. From a total of 320 identified records, 12 studies were deemed eligible for meta-analysis after screening and removal of duplicates. The average PEDro score was 5.11 ± 1.11 indicating overall fair quality of studies.  Common outcome measures included the Berg balance scale, Timed up and go test, Tinetti balance scale, Functional reach test and various single-leg stance tests. All outcomes were significantly improved by the interventions (standard mean difference = 0.65 - 1.29), with little difference between proprioceptive and sensorimotor training. However, the quality of evidence ranged from "very low" to "low" based on GRADE guidelines, suggesting further high-quality studies are needed. This review underscores the potential benefits of sensorimotor and proprioceptive exercises for enhancing balance in older adults, while also highlighting the ambiguity and inconsistency regarding the usage of the terms proprioceptive and sensorimotor training.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
European Journal of Translational Myology
European Journal of Translational Myology MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
27.30%
发文量
74
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
Endocrine disorders in Kearns-Sayre syndrome with different severity of symptoms: two case reports and a literature review. An aged-related structural study of DHPR tetrads in peripheral couplings of human skeletal muscle. Effectiveness of laser therapy among patients with open-angle glaucoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis study. Lower limb acute onset muscle pain: what do we have to look for? A case of isolated rupture of the rectus femoris. Hand-grip strength in recreational downhill skiers: a comparison to normative reference values.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1