Skip Navigation

Age and Ageing 2008 37(1):10-13; doi:10.1093/ageing/afm190
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Laybourne, A. H.
Right arrow Articles by Martin, F. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Laybourne, A. H.
Right arrow Articles by Martin, F. C.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Copyright © The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Geriatrics Society.

Commentary

Falls exercise interventions and reduced falls rate: Always in the patient's interest?

A. H. Laybourne, S. Biggs and F. C. Martin

King's College London, Institute of Gerontology, Melbourne House, 46 Aldwych London WC2B 4LL, UK

Address correspondence to: A. H. Laybourne. Tel: (020) 7848 2767; Fax: (020) 7848 1866. Email: anne.laybourne{at}kcl.ac.uk

Falls are a leading cause of mortality and morbidity in older adults. Physical, psychological and social consequences include injury, fall-related fear and loss of self-efficacy. In turn, these may result in decreased physical activity, reduced functional capacity, and increased risk of institutionalisation. Falls prevention exercise programmes (FPEP) are now widespread within the National Health Service, often part of multifactorial interventions, and are designed to minimise impairments that impact physical function, such as strength and balance. Assessment of the clinical efficacy of FPEPs has therefore focused on the measurement of physical function and rate of falls. Whilst important, this approach may be too narrow to capture the highly variable and multidimensional responses that individuals make to a fall and to a FPEP. We argue that the current focus may miss a paradoxical lack of or even deleterious impact on quality of life, despite a reduction in physical performance-related falls risk. We draw upon the Selective Optimisation and Compensation (SOC) model, developed by Paul and Margret Baltes, to explore how this paradox may be a result of the coping strategies adopted by individuals in response to a fall.

Keywords: falls prevention, activity restriction, quality of life, elderly, selective optimisation and compensation

Received 3 August 2007; accepted in revised form 24 September 2007.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.