Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 14, 2025
Exergaming in Older People Living with HIV Improves Balance, Mobility and Ameliorates Some Aspects of Frailty
Published on: October 6, 2016
Cost-effectiveness of exercise versus multimodal interventions that include exercise to prevent falls among
Cassandra Adjetey1, Ben Karnon1, Ryan S Falck2
1Applied Health Economics Laboratory, Faculty of Management, University of British Columbia - Okanagan, 1137 Alumni Avenue, Kelowna V1V 1V7, BC, Canada; Centre for Aging SMART (Solutions for Mobility, Activity, Rehabilitation and Technology) at Vancouver Coastal Health, Robert H.N. Ho Research Centre, 7-F/2635 Laurel St, Vancouver, BC V5Z 1M9, Canada.
Objective:
To compare the cost-effectiveness of exercise as a unimodal intervention versus multimodal interventions that included exercise in conjunction with other falls prevention strategies to prevent falls among community-dwelling older adults.
Design:
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Data Sources:
MEDLINE, EMBASE, NHS EED, and CINAHL (1 January 1946 to June 2022).
Eligibility Criteria:
Economic evaluations of fall prevention strategies that included exercise delivered as a unimodal intervention or a multimodal intervention that included exercise in conjunction with other falls prevention strategies among community-dwelling adults aged 60 years and over.
Results:
Eighteen studies were included in this review: 9 unimodal, 6 multimodal, and 3 that included exercise delivered as both a unimodal and a multimodal intervention. In the cost-effectiveness analyses, 61.5 % (n = 8/13) of exercise-only unimodal interventions demonstrated cost-effectiveness, compared with 33.3 % (n = 2/6) of multimodal interventions. In the cost-utility analyses, 60 % (n = 6/10) of unimodal interventions compared with zero multimodal interventions (n = 0/4) demonstrated cost-effectiveness. Sixteen studies (25,017 participants) were included in our meta-analysis. Incremental costs were $128 [-$661, $1644] (2021 US dollars) for exercise-only unimodal interventions and $786 [-$72, $1644] for multimodal interventions. Estimated incremental quality-adjusted life-years was 0.09 [-0.37, 0.55] for exercise-only unimodal interventions and 0.00 [-0.04, 0.04] for multimodal interventions. Both exercise-only and multimodal interventions had an estimated 28 % reduction in falls versus the control, with incidence rate ratios for exercise-only unimodal interventions of 0.72 [0.62, 0.83] and for multimodal interventions of 0.72 [0.25, 2.09].
Conclusion:
Exercise delivered as a unimodal intervention, particularly resistance training, provided the best value for money for fall prevention. Multimodal interventions that included exercise did not demonstrate additional benefits in terms of costs, quality of life, or fall prevention compared with exercise-only unimodal interventions. This finding may be due to the smaller number of multimodal interventions available.
Review Registration:
PROSPERO CRD42022295561.
Registration Title:
Comparing the cost-effectiveness of multimodal versus unimodal interventions that include exercise to prevent falls among community-dwelling older adults: A systematic review.
