↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

The effect of flat and textured insoles on the balance of primary care elderly people: a randomized controlled clinical trial

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Interventions in Aging, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
155 Mendeley
Title
The effect of flat and textured insoles on the balance of primary care elderly people: a randomized controlled clinical trial
Published in
Clinical Interventions in Aging, February 2018
DOI 10.2147/cia.s149038
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cecília de Morais Barbosa, Manoel Barros Bértolo, Juliana Zonzini Gaino, Michael Davitt, Zoraida Sachetto, Eduardo de Paiva Magalhães

Abstract

Aging is associated with reduced postural stability and increased fall risk. Foot orthoses have been reported as an adjuvant intervention to improve balance by stimulating foot plantar mechanical receptors and thus increasing somatosensory input. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of flat and textured insoles on the balance of primary care elderly people. Prospective, parallel, randomized, and single-blind trial. A total of 100 subjects from a primary care unit, aged ≥65 years, were randomly assigned to intervention groups with flat insoles (n=33), textured insoles (n=33), or control group (n=34) without insoles. The Berg Balance Scale and the Timed Up and Go test were assessed at baseline and after 4 weeks. Improvements in the Berg Balance Scale and the Timed Up and Go test were noted only in intervention groups with insoles but not in control group. No significant difference was found between flat and textured insoles. Minor adverse effects were noted only in the group with textured insoles. The results suggest that foot orthoses (both flat and textured insoles) are effective in improving balance in primary care elderly people. They may represent a low-cost and high-availability adjuvant strategy to improve balance and prevent falls in this population.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 155 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 155 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 26 17%
Student > Master 20 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 7%
Researcher 9 6%
Student > Postgraduate 7 5%
Other 23 15%
Unknown 59 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 34 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 11%
Sports and Recreations 11 7%
Engineering 9 6%
Neuroscience 8 5%
Other 19 12%
Unknown 57 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 March 2018.
All research outputs
#16,725,651
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#1,182
of 1,968 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#270,656
of 448,849 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#27
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,968 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 448,849 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.