Table 2 Characteristics of included studies

Hall [23]

N = 15, n.a.

Effects of Tai Chi programme on balance

CG: n.a.

2 × 90′ p.w. for 12 w. = 24 s = 2,160′

Standing and walking, Sensori organisation test (SOT) and walking in an obstacle course

CP (A-Ve): two-choice reaction time test

72.2 ± 7.7

EG: GST

Hiyamazu [29]

N = 43

Investigate the effects of dual task balance training on standing postural control while performing a cognitive task

CG: GST

2 × 60′ p.w. for 12 w. = 24 s 1,440′

Chair stand test; functional reach; Timed up and go COP displacements

Trail making test A + B in single condition EC: (Vi-Ve) Stroop test

CG: n = 19

EG:GDT

16f/3 m; 71.2 ± 4.4

EG: n = 17

10f/7 m; 72 ± 5.1

Silsupadol [66]

N = 21, n.a., ≥65

Comparison of three different balance trainings (GST and GDT with fixed and variable task priority) on balance

EG1: GST

3 × 45′ p.w. for 4 w. = 12 h = 540′

Walking COP displacements, gait parameters (speed, stride length) narrow walk

EC (A-Ve): auditory Stroop task

EG1: n = 7

EG2 + 3: GDT

CP (A-Ve): counting backwards

EG2: n = 8

EG3: n = 6

Trombetti [80]

N = 134

Effects of a music-based exercise programme on gait, balance and fall risk

CG: -EG: GDT

60′ p.w. for 12 m = 52 h = 3,120

Walking variability (GAITRaite); angular velocity COP transducers

CP (A-Ve): counting backwards down from 50

CG: n = 68 (65 f/3 m)

EG: n = 66 (64f/2 m)

Westlake [93]

N = 36, n.a.

Effects of sensori balance training on proprioceptive reintegration

CG: education EG:GDT

3 × 60′ p.w. for 8 w. = 24 s = 1,440′

Standing force platform, COP displacements after vibration disturbance

CP (A-Ve): counting backwards 3 s

CG: n = 19, >65

EG: n = 17, >65

Dault [16]

N = 30, n.a.

Training effects visual spatial dual task on postural sway while standing

SDT

3 × 3 trials of 60″ = 9′

Standing, force platform, COP displacements (RMS and mean power frequency)

VS (Vi-Ve): Manekin test

YA: n = 15, 22 ± 1.5

OA: n = 15, 79.1 ± 4.9

Doumas [18]

N = 18, f/m

Training effects on concurrent posture and working memory tasks

SDT

11 × 30′ =330′

Standing postural stability on tilting platform; COP displacements

EC (Vi-Ve): n-back task

YA: n = 8, 26.6 ± 1.9

OA: n = 10, 66.9 ± 3.3

Bisson [9]

n = 24; f/m

Comparison of Biofeedback and Virtual Reality Training on balance

BF: GST

2 × 30′ p.w. for 10 w. = 20 s; 600′

CB&M scale Standing on force platform; COP displacements (RMS)

PS (A-Ve): reaction on auditory cue

BF: 74.4 ± 4.92

VR: GDT

VR: 74.4 ± 3.65

Heiden and Lajoie [28]

N = 16

Games-based biofeedback training and the attentional demands of balance performance

CG: -

2 × 30′ p.w. for 8 w. = 16 s = 480′

CB&M scale

PS (A-Ve): reaction on auditory cue

mean age 77

EG: GDT

6 min walk

CG: n = 7 (6f /1 m)

COP displacements (RMS)

EG: n = 9 (5f/4 m)

Heiden and Lajoie [28]

N = 16

Games-based biofeedback training and the attentional demands of balance performance

CG: -

2 × 30′ p.w. for 8 w. = 16 s = 480′

CB&M scale

PS (A-Ve): reaction on auditory cue

mean age 77

EG: GDT

6 min walk

CG: n = 7 (6f /1 m)

COP displacements (RMS)

EG: n = 9 (5f/4 m)

Toulotte [79]

N = 16, f

Comparison of effects of static and dynamic balance training for fallers and non-fallers

GDT

2 × 60′ p.w. for 3 m = 24 h = 1,440′

Walking and Standing under ST or DT, OLB, steps per min, speed, stride time, step time, single-support time, stride length; step length (additional motor task under DT)

n.a.

F: n = 8, 71.1 ± 5

NF: n = 8, 68.4 ± 4.5

You [104]

N = 13, n.a

Practice effects of a cognitive gait intervention on cognition and gait in Fallers

CG: SST

18 × 30′ in 6 w. = 18 s = 540′

Walking, gait velocity and stability (sway deviation (cm) of COP)

EC (A-M): word lists and calculating tasks over headphones; writing down remembered items

CG: 68.0 ± 3.3

EG: 70.5 ± 6.8

EG: SDT