ICT-based system to predict and prevent falls (iStoppFalls): results from an international multicenter randomized controlled trial

Table 4 Subgroup analyses for exercise adherence Group comparison between baseline and post-assessment (Mean ± Standard Deviation)

	High-adherence >90 min (n = 18)		Low-adherence <90 min (n = 53)		Baseline comparison	Pre-post comparison
	Pre	Post	Pre	Post	Baseline comparison	3-way	2-way^a
Primary outcome measures					p	p	p
Physiological Profile Assessment, score	0.84 ± .85	0.39 ± .77	0.55 ± 0.93	0.34 ± .91	0.430	0.044	0.031
European Quality of Life – 5 Dimensions, VAS	70.7 ± 13.9	80.3 ± 13.17	80.6 ± 14.6	80.8 ± 14.18	0.057	0.099	0.052
Selected secondary outcome measures
Sway area, mm²	1093 ± 778	554 ± 487	754.9 ± 662	718 ± 1048	0.150	0.057	0.046
Sensor-based full tandem stance, s	25.0 ± 10.0	26.5 ± 8.0	25.2 ± 9.5	23.1 ± 10.0	0.568	0.092	0.040
Knee extension strength, kg	20.1 ± 6.4	27.8 ± 15.8	24.5 ± 9.8	28.0 ± 10.6	0.277	0.425	0.291
Sensor-based chair stand test, s	11.1 ± 2.9	10.4 ± 3.0	12.6 ± 4.4	10.8 ± 10.8	0.133	0.053	0.983
Sensor-based stepping reaction time, ms	756 ± 161	657 ± 107	788 ± 196	731 ± 140	0.685	0.112	0.041
Trail Making Test part B, s	108 ± 52	103 ± 54	117 ± 58	98 ± 50	0.811	0.860	0.591
Hand reaction time, ms	260 ± 36	276 ± 49	242 ± 41	238 ± 42	0.239	0.004	0.505
Attention Network Test - conflict, ms	152 ± 63	114 ± 57	127 ± 82	117 ± 53	0.394	0.088	0.044
Patient Health Questionnaire – 9, score	3.4 ± 3.0	2.8 ± 2.8	3.0 ± 3.4	2.4 ± 3.0	0.945	0.434	0.213
Iconographical – Falls Efficacy Scale, score	13.8 ± 4.3	10.2 ± 7.0	16.3 ± 5.3	13.3 ± 8.9	0.173	0.775	0.854

Higher scores are better for European Quality of Life – 5 Dimensions, sensor-based full tandem stance and knee extension strength (for all other scores lower values indicate performance improvement)
^aComparing high-adherers and control group

ISSN: 1861-6909