Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39373575›Full record

Trial reportAge and ageing2024

Feasibility and acceptability of the HOLObalance telerehabilitation system compared with standard care for older adults at risk of falls: the HOLOBalance assessor blinded pilot randomised controlled study.

Marousa Pavlou, Carol Ann Flavell, Fariba Mostajeran Gourtani, Christos Nikitas, Dimitris Kikidis, Athanasios Bibas, Dimitris Gatsios, Vassilis Tsakanikas, Dimitrios I Fotiadis, Dimitrios Koutsouris and 7 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Age and ageing, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Qualitative assessment of mobility in older adults: a scoping review of process-oriented behavioural criteria.European review of aging and physical activity : official journal of the European Group for Research into Elderly and Physical Activity · 2026
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors.

Marousa PavlouCentre for Human and Applied Physiological Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
Carol Ann FlavellCentre for Human and Applied Physiological Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
Fariba Mostajeran GourtaniHuman-Computer Interaction Group, Department of Informatics, Universität Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.
Christos Nikitas1st Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Hippocrateion General Hospital, Athens, Greece.
Dimitris Kikidis1st Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Hippocrateion General Hospital, Athens, Greece.
Athanasios Bibas1st Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Hippocrateion General Hospital, Athens, Greece.
Dimitris GatsiosUnit of Medical Technology and Intelligent Information Systems, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece.
Vassilis TsakanikasUnit of Medical Technology and Intelligent Information Systems, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece.
Dimitrios I FotiadisUnit of Medical Technology and Intelligent Information Systems, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece.
Dimitrios KoutsourisBiomedical Engineering Laboratory, School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Frank SteinickeHuman-Computer Interaction Group, Department of Informatics, Universität Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.
Isabelle Daniela WalzDepartment of Neurology and Neuroscience, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Christoph MaurerDepartment of Neurology and Neuroscience, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Sofia Papadopoulou1st Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Hippocrateion General Hospital, Athens, Greece.
Michalis Tsoukatos1st Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Hippocrateion General Hospital, Athens, Greece.
Athanasios PardalisUnit of Medical Technology and Intelligent Information Systems, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece.
Doris-Eva BamiouEar Institute, University College London, London, UK.

Funding

European Union's Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme 769574
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFalls have high socioeconomic costs. Information and communication technologies may support provision and monitoring of multisensory (MSR) physiotherapy programmes. The HOLOBalance platform used augmented reality holograms to provide patient-centred, individualised MSR.

objectivesTo determine the platform's safety, acceptability and feasibility, investigate functional gait and dynamic balance benefits and provide data for a definitive trial. DESIGN AND

settingSingle-blinded pilot randomised controlled feasibility study. Interventions were conducted at clinical sites or participants' homes in three European countries.

participantsCommunity-dwelling older adults (median age 73 years; 64.2% female) at risk of falls were enrolled (May 2020-August 2021).

methodsParticipants were randomised to an 8-week clinic or home-based telerehabilitation MSR or OTAGO (control group) programme. Compliance, satisfaction, and adverse events determined feasibility. Clinical outcomes, assessed (blinded) within one-week prior to and post-intervention, included functional gait assessment (FGA), Mini BESTest and cognitive function.

resultsRandomisation to completion rate was 76.15% with 109 participants recruited (n = 289 screened). Drop-out rate was similar between groups. Adverse events were reported (n = 3) in the control group. Sixty-nine percent would recommend the HOLOBalance intervention. Findings were similar for the home and clinic-based arms of each intervention; data was combined for analysis. FGA (95%CI [1.63, 4.19]) and Mini-BESTest (95%CI [1.46, 3.93]) showed greater improvement in the HOLOBalance group with a clinically meaningful change of 4/30 noted for the FGA.

conclusionsHOLObalance was feasible to implement and acceptable to older adults at risk of falls, with FGA and Mini-BEST improvements exceeding those for the OTAGO programme. A definitive trial is warranted.

Indexed as

Accidental FallsFeasibility StudiesTelerehabilitationAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleGaitHumansIndependent LivingMalePilot ProjectsPostural BalanceSingle-Blind Methodaugmented realitybalance rehabilitationfalls riskolder adultsolder people

Identifiers

PMID39373575
PMCPMC11457341

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.