Reference | Purpose | Type of study | Participants | WBV exercises performed | Study results | Plate/parameters | Frequency and duration | Measurements |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Bautmans et al. [1] | To investigate the feasibility of WBV in institutionalized elderly, and its impact on functional capacity and muscle performance | Randomized controlled trial: | N = 24 | Lunge, squat, deep squat, wide stance squat, calf, calves deep (all static) | WBV performed significantly better on timed up-and-go test and Tinetti Test | Power Plate® (vertical vibration) | 3 times/week for 6 weeks, 1–3 × 30–60 s/session | Maximum grip strength |
 1. WBV group | F, 15; M, 9 | 30–40 Hz | Chair stand test | |||||
Mean age, 77.5 ± 11.0 | 2 or 5 mm | Timed up-and-go test | ||||||
 2. Exercise group (static) | Type: institutionalized | Tinetti balance scale test | ||||||
Back scratch test | ||||||||
Chair sit-and-reach test | ||||||||
Leg extension | ||||||||
Bissonnette et al. [3] | To evaluate the effects of 8 weeks of WBV training on functional movements |  1. WBV group | N = 19 | Calf raises, squats, bicep curls, triceps ext (all static) | WBV significantly improved balance, flexibility, strength, and functional determinants (walk longer distances and were able to get in and out of car more easily) | WAVE Pro® (vertical vibration) | 3 times/week for 8 weeks, 2 × 30 s/session approx. 15 min/session | Chair stand test |
F, 14; M, 5 | 35–40 Hz (upper body) | Arm curl test | ||||||
Age range, 60–85 | 40–45 Hz (lower body) | Chair sit-and-reach test | ||||||
Mean age, 71.4 ± 7.2 | 2 or 4 mm | Back scratch test | ||||||
Type: noninstitutionalized | 8-ft up-and-go test | |||||||
Bogaerts et al. [6] | Evaluate the effects of 12-month WBV program on balance (measured by computerized posturography) | Randomized controlled trial: | N = 220 | Squat, deep squat, wide stance squat, one-legged squat, lunge, toes stand, toes stand deep, moving heels (static and dynamic) | No significant differences between groups regarding most aspects of postural control. WBV may improve aspects of seniors' postural control | Power Plate® (vertical vibration) | 3 times/week for 1 year, 4–15 × 30–60 s/session | Sensory organization test |
 1. WBV group | F, 106; M, 114 | 30–40 Hz (overload principle) | Max. 40 min/session (progressive increase) | Motor control test | ||||
Age range, 60–80 | 2.5 or 5.0 mm | Adaptation test | ||||||
 2. Exercise group (cardiovascular and resistance training) | Mean age, 67.1 ± 0.6 | |||||||
 3. Control group | Type: noninstitutionalized | |||||||
Bogaerts et al. [5] | The effects of 1-year WBV training on cardiorespiratory fitness and muscle strength in community-dwelling adults | Randomized controlled trial: | N = 220 | Squat, deep squat, wide stance squat, one-legged squat, lunge, toes stand, toes stand deep, moving heels (static and dynamic) | WBV and exercise group increased significantly on time-to-peak exercise peak VO2 and muscle strength. WBV group increased significantly on heart rate. Exercise group improved significantly more in time-to-peak exercise. | Power Plate® (vertical vibration) | 3 times/week for 1 year, 4–15 × 30–60 s/session | Heart rate |
 1. WBV group | F, 106; M, 114 | 30–40 Hz (overload principle) | Max. 40 min/session (progressive increase) | Cycle ergometer | ||||
Age range, 60–80 | 2.5 or 5.0 mm | Isometric knee extension strength (dynamometer) | ||||||
 2. Exercise group (cardiovascular, resistance balance, and flexibility training) | Mean age, 67.1 ± 0.6 | |||||||
 3. Control group | Type: noninstitutionalized | |||||||
Bogaerts et al. [4] | Investigated the effect of 6 months of WBV training, in combination with daily supplements of calcium and high dose vitamin D, on balance, functional performance and fall risk in institutionalized women | Randomized controlled trial: | N = 113 | Squat, deep squat, wide stance squat, toes stand and one-legged squat | Significant improvements in endurance capacity, walking at preferred speed, and TUG vs. supplementation alone. Sway velocity and maximal isometric knee strength improved only in WBV group. No additional benefit of WBV training detected on fall risk and postural control | Power Plate® (vertical vibration) | 3 times/week for 6 months | Sway velocity |
 1. WBV group | F, 113; M, 0 | 30–40 Hz (overload principle) | Max. 15 min/session (progressive increase) | Sensory organization test | ||||
Age range, over 70 | 1.6 or 2.2Â mm | Timed up-and-go test | ||||||
 2. Control group | Mean age, 79.6 | 10 m walk test | ||||||
Type: institutionalized | Shuttle walk | |||||||
Physiological profile | ||||||||
Assessment | ||||||||
Brogardh et al. [7] | To evaluate the feasibility and possible effects of WBV training on muscle strength and gait performance in people with late effects of polio | Case-controlled pilot study | N = 5 | Static squat position (knees flexed 40° to 55°) | No statistically significant difference in isokinetic or isometric knee muscle strength or in gait performance | Xrsize (vertical vibration) | 2 times/week for 5 weeks | Isokinetic and isometric knee muscle strength |
 1. WBV group | F, 2; M, 3 | 25 Hz | 4–10 × 40–60 s/session |  | ||||
Age range, 55–71 | 3.75 mm | Max. 30 min/session (progressive increase) | Timed up-and-go test | |||||
Mean age, 64 ± 6.7 | Comfortable and fast gait | |||||||
Type: recruited from hospital rehabilitation | Speed test | |||||||
6-min walk test | ||||||||
Bruyere et al. [8] | To investigate the effects of WBV in elderly | Randomized controlled trial: | N = 42 | Just stood on platform (static) | WBV group improved on gait score vs. no change in control group. WBV group improved on body balance score and timed test vs. no change in control group. WBV group had significantly greater improvements from baseline on 8 of 9 items on the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey compared to control | Galileo 900 | 3 times/week for 6 weeks, 4 × 1 m/session | Tinetti balance scale test |
 1. WBV group (plus physiotherapy) | F, 31; M, 11 | 10–26 Hz | Timed up-and-go test | |||||
Age range, 63–98 | 3 or 7 mm | Health-related quality of living test | ||||||
 2. Exercise group (physiotherapy only) | Mean age, 81.9 ± 6.9 | |||||||
Type: institutionalized | ||||||||
Cardinale et al. [9] | To analyze the acute effects of a single session of WBV exercise on anabolic hormones in aged individuals | Randomized controlled, crossover trial: | N = 20 | Static squat position | WBV produced an acute increase in circulating levels IGF-1a and cortisol greater than that observed following the same exercise protocol conducted without vibration | Fitvibe (vertical vibration) | 1 session, 5 × 1 min | Anthropometric measures |
 1. WBV group | F, 11; M, 9 | 30 Hz | Plasma cortisol | |||||
Age range, 66–85 | 4 mm | Plasma testosterone | ||||||
 2. Exercise group (same exercises, no WBV) | Median age, 70 | Plasma growth hormone | ||||||
Type: institutionalized | Plasma IGF-1 | |||||||
Carlucci et al. [11] | To investigate acute residual effects of a single vibration session on balance control in a group of elderly women |  1. WBV group | N = 36 | Static high squat, dynamic squat, static deep squat, static wide stance squat, static right lunge, static left lunge | No significant variations in postural parameters. A single- bout of WBV does not induce dangerous acute effects on elderly women balance control ability. | Well-net Vibe (vertical vibration) | 1 session, 1–2 × 30–60 s | Various body sway parameters (force plate) |
F, 36; M, 0 | 35Â Hz | Max. 9.5Â min | ||||||
 2. Control group | Mean age, 71.8 ± 4.7 | |||||||
Type: noninstitutionalized | ||||||||
Cheung et al. [13] | To investigate the efficacy of high-frequency WBV on balance ability in elderly women | Randomized controlled trial: | N = 69 | Just stood on platform (static) | WBV showed significant improvement in movement velocity, maximum point excursion, and directional control. Reaction time and endpoint excursion failed to show significant changes. No significant changes in functional reach test between groups. | Galileo 900 | 3 times/week for 3 months, 1 × 3 min/session | Limits of stability (Basic Balance Master System) |
F, 69; M, 0 | 20Â Hz | Functional reach test | ||||||
 1. WBV group | Age range, over 60 | 0 or 5.3 mm (medial to distal) | Directional control | |||||
 2. Control group | Mean age, 72.36 ± 4.93 | Movement velocity | ||||||
Type: noninstitutionalized | ||||||||
Cochrane et al. [14] | Examine the acute physiological effects of acute WBV exercise in healthy young and older people | Comparative control trial: | 12 healthy young (mean age, 21.5 ± 2.8) | 9 conditions, static squat | Load and vibration associated with increase VO2, heart rate, rating of perceived exertion and blood pressure. No significant differences between groups. Jendrassik maneuver increased VO2 but no significant differences between groups | Prototype: seated | 1 session, 9 × 4 min | Anthropometric measures |
12 healthy old (mean age, 69.2 ± 7.2) | 1. No load (0% body mass) | WBV leg press machine | Countermovement jump | |||||
 1. Young group | Type: noninstitutionalized | 2. 20% body mass | 30 Hz | Isometric maximal voluntary contraction | ||||
 2. Old group | F, 12; M, 12 | 3. 40% body mass | 1 mm | Oxygen uptake | ||||
Blood pressure | ||||||||
Rating of perceived exertion | ||||||||
Heart rate | ||||||||
Physical activity | ||||||||
Questionnaire | ||||||||
Ebersbach et al. [18] | To compare the effects of WBV and conventional physiotherapy on levodo paresistant disturbances of balance and gait in idiopathic Parkinson's disease | Randomized controlled rater-blinded trial: | N = 21 (27 I.T.T) | Static squat position (slightly bent knees and hip) | No conclusive evidence for superior efficacy of WBV compared with conventional balance training. Both groups improved on Tinetti Balance Scale, gait velocity, stand–walk–sit test and Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale. Posturography improved in patients with WBV. | Galileo 900, 25 Hz | 5 times/week for 4 weeks | Tinetti balance scale test |
 1. WBV group | F, 7; M, 14 | 7 or 14 mm | Max. 15 min/session | Time to walk 10 m test | ||||
Age range, 62–84 | Stand–walk–sit test | |||||||
 2. Exercise group (physiotherapy) | Mean age, 73.8 ± 6.42 | Unified Parkinson’s disease | ||||||
Type: institutionalized | Rating scale (section III) | |||||||
Posturography | ||||||||
Pull test | ||||||||
Gusi et al. [19] | To compare the effects of WBV using a reciprocating platform at frequencies lower than 20 Hz and a walking-based exercise program on bone mineral density and balance in postmenopausal women | Randomized controlled trial: | N = 28 (36 I.T.T.) | Static squat position (knees flexed 60°) | WBV is more effective than walking to improve 2 major determinants of bone fractures: hip bone mineral density (4.3%) and balance (29%). Bone mineral density at lumbar spine was unaltered in both groups. | Galileo 2000 | 3 times/week for 8 months, 6 × 1 min/session | Hip and lumbar bone mineral density (using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry) |
 1. WBV group | F, 28; M, 0 | 12.66 Hz | ||||||
Mean age, 66.0 ± 5 | 3 cm | Blind flamingo test | ||||||
 2. Exercise group (walking) | Type: noninstitutionalized | |||||||
Haas et al. [20] | To analyze the effects of WBV on motor control in Parkinson's disease patients | Randomized controlled crossover trial: | N = 68 | Static squat position | Significant improvement (16.8%) on the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating motor score vs. marginal changes in control. Tremor and rigidity scores were improved by 25% and 24%, respectively. | Zeptor® med System | 1 session | Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale |
 1. WBV group | F, 15; M, 53 | 6 Hz | 5 × 1 min | |||||
Mean age, 65.0 ± 7.8 | 3 mm | |||||||
 2. Control group | Type: not disclosed | |||||||
Kawanabe et al. [23] | Determine the beneficial effect of WBV in addition to muscle strengthening, balance and walking exercises on walking ability in the elderly |  1. WBV group (plus exercise) | N = 67 | Static squat position | Walking speed, step length, max standing time on one leg significantly improved in WBV group; no significant changes in exercise group. | Galileo | 1 time/week for 2 months, 1 × 4 min/session | Walking speed |
F, 63; M, 4 | 12–20 Hz | Step length | ||||||
 2. Exercise group (exercises not defined) | Age range, 59–86 | Max standing time on one leg (bilateral) | ||||||
Mean age, 72.0 | ||||||||
Type: noninstitutionalized | ||||||||
Machado et al. [28] | Determine whether 10 weeks of WBV training has a significant effect of strength, muscle mass, muscle power, and mobility in older women | Randomized controlled trial: | N = 26 | Half squat, deep squat, wide stance squat, calves (static and dynamic) | WBV training significantly increases muscle strength induced by thigh muscle hypertrophy with no change in muscle power. Timed up-and-go test improved significantly after training (9%) in WBV group only. | Fitvibe | 3–5 times/week for 10 weeks | Muscle cross-sectional area |
 1. WBV group | F, 26; M, 0 | 20–40 Hz | Max. 22 min/session (progressive increase) | Timed up-and-go test | ||||
Age range, 65–90 | 2 or 4 mm | Leg-press MVIC test | ||||||
 2. Control group | Mean age, 77.5 | Surface electromyographic activity | ||||||
 | Type: noninstitutionalized | |||||||
Raimundo et al. [33] | To compare the efficacy of 8 months of low frequency vibration and a walk-based program in health-related fitness | Randomized trial: | N = 27 | Static squat position (knees flexed 120°) | Exercise group improved the time spent to walk 4 m (20%) and to perform the chair rise test (12%) compared to WBV group. WBV group showed improved (7%) vertical jump. No changes in isokinetic measurements in both groups | Galileo 2000 | 3 times/week for 8 months | Anthropometric variables |
 1. WBV group | F, 27; M, 0 | 12.6 Hz | 6 × 1 min/session | Vertical jump test | ||||
Mean age, 66.0 ± 5 | 3 mm | Chair rise test | ||||||
 2. Exercise group (walking) | Type: noninstitutionalized | Maximal walking speed test (4 m) | ||||||
Rees et al. [35] | Investigate the effects of vibration on muscle performance and mobility in healthy untrained population | Randomized controlled trial: | N = 43 | 1. Standing with bent knees (week 1–4) | WBV increases lower limb strength. No effect on functional performance tasks (compared with exercise group). Both WBV and exercise groups improved on sit-to-stand test, fast walk test, and knee extension strength compared with control group. | Galileo | 3 times/week for 2 months | Sit-to-stand test |
 1. WBV group | F, 20; M, 23 | 2. Dynamic lower limb exercises (week 5–8) | 26 Hz | Max. 8 min/session | Timed up-and-go test | |||
Age range, 66–85 | 5–8 mm | Fast walk | ||||||
 2. Exercise group (same exercises, no WBV) | Mean age, 73.5 ± 4.59 | Stair mobility test | ||||||
 3. Control group | Type: not disclosed | Isokinetic strength | ||||||
Rees et al. [36] | Investigated the effects of vibration on strength (force-producing capacity) and power in older adults who are healthy | Randomized trial: | N = 30 | 1. Standing with bent knees (week 1–4) | WBV group significantly improved ankle plantar flexor strength and power compared with the exercise group. No significant differences between both for knee flexor or extensor strength. | Galileo | 3 times/week for 8 weeks, 6 × 45–80 s/session (overload principle) | Maximum isokinetic strength and power (examined hips, knees, and ankles) |
 1. WBV group | F, 14; M, 16 | 2. Dynamic lower limb exercises (week 5–8) | 26 Hz | |||||
Age range, 66–85 | 5–8 mm | |||||||
 2. Exercise group (same exercises, no WBV) | Mean age, 73.7 ± 4.6 | |||||||
Type: not disclosed | ||||||||
Rees et al. [37] | Investigate the effects of vibration exercise on postural steadiness performance in a healthy, older population | Randomized controlled trial: | N = 43 | 1. Standing with bent knees (week 1–4) | Vibration exercise can improve balance in an older population. Increases in one-legged postural steadiness (in WBV compared to control and exercise groups) | Galileo | 3 times/week for 8 weeks, 6 × 45–80 s/session | One-legged postural steadiness test |
 1. WBV group | F, 20; M, 23 | 2. Dynamic lower limb exercises (week 5–8) | 26 Hz | |||||
Age range, 66–85 | 5–8 mm | |||||||
 2. Exercise group (same exercises, no WBV) | Mean age, 73.5 ± 4.59 | |||||||
 3. Control group | Type: not disclosed | |||||||
Roelants et al. [41] | Investigate the effects of 24 weeks of WBV training on knee extension strength and speed of movement and on countermovement jump performance in older women | Randomized controlled trial: | N = 89 | High squat, deep squat, wide stance squat, lunge (static and dynamic) | WBV as effective as exercise group to improve knee extension strength, speed of movement and countermovement jump. Training effects not significantly different between exercise and WBV groups. | Power Plate® (vertical vibration) | 3 times/week for 24 weeks | Isometric and dynamic strength of knee extensors (dynamometer) |
 1. WBV group | F, 89; M, 0 | 35–40 Hz, 2.5 or 5 mm | Max. 30 min/session | Countermovement jump performance | ||||
Age range, 58–74 | Speed of movement of knee extension | |||||||
 2. Exercise group (resistance training) | Mean age, 64.25 ± 0.69 | |||||||
 3. Control group | Type: not disclosed | |||||||
Russo et al. [42] | To test whether training on a high-frequency vibrating platform improves muscular power and bone characteristics in postmenopausal women | Randomized controlled trial: | N = 29 | Static squat position | Muscle power improved 5% in WBV group women, whereas control declined slightly. WBV may be useful to improve muscular power in postmenopausal women. No changes in bone mineral density | Galileo 2000 | 2 times/week for 6 months | Muscle power |
 1. WBV group | F, 29; M, 0 | 12–28 Hz | Max. 6 min/session | Cortical bone density | ||||
Mean age, 61.04 ± 6.68 | Biomarkers of bone turnover | |||||||
 2. Control group | Type: noninstitutionalized | |||||||
Turbanski et al. [45] | To determine the effects of WBV on postural control in Parkinson's disease subjects (PD) | Controlled trial: | N = 52 | Not disclosed; the assumption is standing | WBV can improve postural stability in PD spontaneously WBV group improved significantly better on both the narrow standing and tandem standing test conditions compared to the control | Zeptor® med System | 1 session, 5 × 1 min | Postural stability (narrow and tandem standing) |
 1. WBV group | F, 14; M, 38 | 6 Hz | ||||||
Mean age, 69.1 ± 8.9 | 3 mm | |||||||
 2. Control group | Type: not disclosed | |||||||
van Nees et al. [47] | To determine short-term effects of WBV as a novel method of somatosenory stimulation on postural control in 23 chronic stroke patients |  1. Stroke group | N = 46 | Static squat position (slight flexion) | WBV may improve proprioceptive control of posture in stroke patients. | Galileo 900/ | 1 session, 4 × 45 s | Center of pressure |
F, 10; M, 13 (reported stroke group only) | Galileo 2000 | Movement (force plate) | ||||||
 2. Control group (nonstroke) | Mean age, 61 ± 10.35 | 30 Hz | Motricity index | |||||
Type: noninstitutionalized | 3Â mm | Berg Balance Scale | ||||||
Functional ambulation categories | ||||||||
van Nees et al. [48] | To determine long-term effects of 6 weeks of WBV on postural control and activities of daily living compared to exercise therapy with music | Randomized trial: | N = 53 | Static squat position | Daily sessions of WBV are as effective in terms of recovery, balance, and activities of daily living when comparing to exercise therapy with music in the postacute phase of stroke | Galileo 900/ | 5 times/week for 6 weeks, 4 × 45 s/session | Berg Balance Scale |
 1. WBV group | F, 0; M, 53 | Galileo 2000 | Barthel index | |||||
Mean age, 61.12 ± 9.99 | 30 Hz | Trunk control test | ||||||
 2. Exercise group (same exercises, no WBV) | Type: institutionalized | 3 mm | Rivermead Mobility Index | |||||
Functional ambulation categories | ||||||||
Motricity index | ||||||||
Somatosensory threshold | ||||||||
Verschueren et al. [49] | Assess the musculoskeletal effects of high-frequency loading by means of WBV in postmenopausal women | Randomized controlled trial: | N = 70 | Squat, deep squat, wide stance squat, lunge and one-legged squat (static and dynamic) | WBV improved isometric (+15%) and dynamic (+16%) muscle strength and also significantly increased bone significantly increased bone mineral density of the hip. No changes in hip bone mineral density in exercise or control groups | Power Plate® (vertical vibration) | 3 times/week for 24 weeks | Bone mineral density |
 1. WBV group | F, 70; M, 0 | Max. 30 min/session (progressive overload) | Bone turnover | |||||
Age range, 58–74 | 35–40 Hz | Muscle strength | ||||||
 2. Exercise group (resistance training) | Mean age, 64.24 ± 3.39 | 1.7 or 2.5 mm | Postural control | |||||
 3. Control group | Type: not disclosed | |||||||
von Stengel et al. [51] | To examine whether the effect of multipurpose exercise can be enhanced by WBV | Randomized controlled trial: | N = 151 | Heel rise, one-legged squat, leg abduction, one-legged deep squats with heel raises (dynamic) | WBV embedded in a multipurpose exercise program showed minor additive effects on body composition and neuromuscular performance. Only WBV training resulted in significant increases of leg and trunk flexion strength compared to control group | Vibrafit | 2 times/week for 18 months | Anthropometric variables |
 1. WBV group (plus exercise) | F, 151; M, 0 | 25–35 Hz | 2 × 1 min/session | Maximal isometric leg strength | ||||
Age range, over 65 | 1.7 or 2Â mm | 60Â min exercise/session | Maximal grip strength | |||||
 2. Exercise group (same exercises, no WBV) | Mean age, 68.5 ± 3.1 | 15 min WBV/session | ||||||
 3. Control group | Type: noninstitutionalized |