5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Interventions to reduce falls in hospitals: a systematic review and meta-analysis

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Falls remain a common and debilitating problem in hospitals worldwide. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of falls prevention interventions on falls rates and the risk of falling in hospital.

          Design

          Systematic review and meta-analysis.

          Participants

          Hospitalised adults.

          Intervention

          Prevention methods included staff and patient education, environmental modifications, assistive devices, policies and systems, rehabilitation, medication management and management of cognitive impairment. We evaluated single and multi-factorial approaches.

          Outcome measures

          Falls rate ratios (rate ratio: RaR) and falls risk, as defined by the odds of being a faller in the intervention compared to control group (odds ratio: OR).

          Results

          There were 43 studies that satisfied the systematic review criteria and 23 were included in meta-analyses. There was marked heterogeneity in intervention methods and study designs. The only intervention that yielded a significant result in the meta-analysis was education, with a reduction in falls rates (RaR = 0.70 [0.51–0.96], P = 0.03) and the odds of falling (OR = 0.62 [0.47–0.83], P = 0.001). The patient and staff education studies in the meta-analysis were of high quality on the GRADE tool. Individual trials in the systematic review showed evidence for clinician education, some multi-factorial interventions, select rehabilitation therapies, and systems, with low to moderate risk of bias.

          Conclusion

          Patient and staff education can reduce hospital falls. Multi-factorial interventions had a tendency towards producing a positive impact. Chair alarms, bed alarms, wearable sensors and use of scored risk assessment tools were not associated with significant fall reductions.

          Related collections

          Most cited references91

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables.

          This article is the first of a series providing guidance for use of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system of rating quality of evidence and grading strength of recommendations in systematic reviews, health technology assessments (HTAs), and clinical practice guidelines addressing alternative management options. The GRADE process begins with asking an explicit question, including specification of all important outcomes. After the evidence is collected and summarized, GRADE provides explicit criteria for rating the quality of evidence that include study design, risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness, and magnitude of effect. Recommendations are characterized as strong or weak (alternative terms conditional or discretionary) according to the quality of the supporting evidence and the balance between desirable and undesirable consequences of the alternative management options. GRADE suggests summarizing evidence in succinct, transparent, and informative summary of findings tables that show the quality of evidence and the magnitude of relative and absolute effects for each important outcome and/or as evidence profiles that provide, in addition, detailed information about the reason for the quality of evidence rating. Subsequent articles in this series will address GRADE's approach to formulating questions, assessing quality of evidence, and developing recommendations. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Book: not found

            Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Interventions for preventing falls in older people in care facilities and hospitals

              Background Falls in care facilities and hospitals are common events that cause considerable morbidity and mortality for older people. This is an update of a review first published in 2010 and updated in 2012. Objectives To assess the effects of interventions designed to reduce the incidence of falls in older people in care facilities and hospitals. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register (August 2017); Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (2017, Issue 8); and MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and trial registers to August 2017. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials of interventions for preventing falls in older people in residential or nursing care facilities, or hospitals. Data collection and analysis One review author screened abstracts; two review authors screened full-text articles for inclusion. Two review authors independently performed study selection, 'Risk of bias' assessment and data extraction. We calculated rate ratios (RaR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for rate of falls and risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs for outcomes such as risk of falling (number of people falling). We pooled results where appropriate. We used GRADE to assess the quality of evidence. Main results Thirty-five new trials (77,869 participants) were included in this update. Overall, we included 95 trials (138,164 participants), 71 (40,374 participants; mean age 84 years; 75% women) in care facilities and 24 (97,790 participants; mean age 78 years; 52% women) in hospitals. The majority of trials were at high risk of bias in one or more domains, mostly relating to lack of blinding. With few exceptions, the quality of evidence for individual interventions in either setting was generally rated as low or very low. Risk of fracture and adverse events were generally poorly reported and, where reported, the evidence was very low-quality, which means that we are uncertain of the estimates. Only the falls outcomes for the main comparisons are reported here. Care facilities Seventeen trials compared exercise with control (typically usual care alone). We are uncertain of the effect of exercise on rate of falls (RaR 0.93, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.20; 2002 participants, 10 studies; I² = 76%; very low-quality evidence). Exercise may make little or no difference to the risk of falling (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.18; 2090 participants, 10 studies; I² = 23%; low-quality evidence). There is low-quality evidence that general medication review (tested in 12 trials) may make little or no difference to the rate of falls (RaR 0.93, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.35; 2409 participants, 6 studies; I² = 93%) or the risk of falling (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.09; 5139 participants, 6 studies; I² = 48%). There is moderate-quality evidence that vitamin D supplementation (4512 participants, 4 studies) probably reduces the rate of falls (RaR 0.72, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.95; I² = 62%), but probably makes little or no difference to the risk of falling (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.12; I² = 42%). The population included in these studies had low vitamin D levels. Multifactorial interventions were tested in 13 trials. We are uncertain of the effect of multifactorial interventions on the rate of falls (RaR 0.88, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.18; 3439 participants, 10 studies; I² = 84%; very low-quality evidence). They may make little or no difference to the risk of falling (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.05; 3153 participants, 9 studies; I² = 42%; low-quality evidence). Hospitals Three trials tested the effect of additional physiotherapy (supervised exercises) in rehabilitation wards (subacute setting). The very low-quality evidence means we are uncertain of the effect of additional physiotherapy on the rate of falls (RaR 0.59, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.34; 215 participants, 2 studies; I² = 0%), or whether it reduces the risk of falling (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.93; 83 participants, 2 studies; I² = 0%). We are uncertain of the effects of bed and chair sensor alarms in hospitals, tested in two trials (28,649 participants) on rate of falls (RaR 0.60, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.34; I² = 0%; very low-quality evidence) or risk of falling (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.38 to 2.24; I² = 0%; very low-quality evidence). Multifactorial interventions in hospitals may reduce rate of falls in hospitals (RaR 0.80, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.01; 44,664 participants, 5 studies; I² = 52%). A subgroup analysis by setting suggests the reduction may be more likely in a subacute setting (RaR 0.67, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.83; 3747 participants, 2 studies; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain of the effect of multifactorial interventions on the risk of falling (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.09; 39,889 participants; 3 studies; I² = 0%; very low-quality evidence). Authors' conclusions In care facilities: we are uncertain of the effect of exercise on rate of falls and it may make little or no difference to the risk of falling. General medication review may make little or no difference to the rate of falls or risk of falling. Vitamin D supplementation probably reduces the rate of falls but not risk of falling. We are uncertain of the effect of multifactorial interventions on the rate of falls; they may make little or no difference to the risk of falling. In hospitals: we are uncertain of the effect of additional physiotherapy on the rate of falls or whether it reduces the risk of falling. We are uncertain of the effect of providing bed sensor alarms on the rate of falls or risk of falling. Multifactorial interventions may reduce rate of falls, although subgroup analysis suggests this may apply mostly to a subacute setting; we are uncertain of the effect of these interventions on risk of falling. Interventions for preventing falls in older people in care facilities and hospitals Review question How effective are interventions designed to reduce falls in older people in care facilities and hospitals? Background Falls by older people in care facilities, such as nursing homes, and hospitals are common events that may cause loss of independence, injuries, and sometimes death as a result of injury. Effective interventions to prevent falls are therefore important. Many types of interventions are in use. These include exercise, medication interventions that include vitamin D supplementation and reviews of the drugs that people are taking, environment or assistive technologies including bed or chair alarms or the use of special (low/low) beds, social environment interventions that target staff members and changes in the organisational system, and knowledge interventions. A special type of intervention is the multifactorial intervention, where the selection of single interventions such as exercise and vitamin D supplementation is based on an assessment of a person's risk factors for falling. Falls are reported in two ways in our review. One outcome is rate of falls, which is the number of falls. The other outcome is risk of falling, which is the number of people who had one or more falls. Search date We searched the healthcare literature for reports of randomised controlled trials relevant to this review up to August 2017. Study characteristics This review included 95 randomised controlled trials involving 138,164 participants. Seventy-one trials (40,374 participants) were in care facilities, and 24 (97,790 participants) in hospitals. On average, participants were 84 years old in care facilities and 78 years old in hospitals. In care facilities, 75% were women and in hospitals, 52% were women. Quality of the evidence The majority of trials were at high risk of bias, mostly relating to lack of blinding. With few exceptions, the quality of evidence for individual interventions in either setting was generally rated as low or very low. Risk of fracture and adverse events were generally poorly reported and, where reported, the evidence was very low quality, which means that we are uncertain of the estimates. Key results There was evidence, often from single studies, for a wide range of interventions used for preventing falls in both settings. However, in the following we summarise only the falls outcomes for four key interventions in care facilities and three key interventions in hospitals. Care facilities We are uncertain of the effect of exercise on the rate of falls (very low-quality evidence) and it may make little or no difference to the risk of falling (low-quality evidence). General medication review may make little or no difference to the rate of falls (low-quality evidence) or the risk of falling (low-quality evidence). Prescription of vitamin D probably reduces the rate of falls (moderate-quality evidence) but probably makes little or no difference to the risk of falling (moderate-quality evidence). The population included in these studies appeared to have low vitamin D levels. We are uncertain of the effect of multifactorial interventions on the rate of falls (very low-quality evidence). They may make little or no difference to the risk of falling (low-quality evidence). Hospitals We are uncertain whether physiotherapy aimed specifically at reducing falls in addition to usual rehabilitation in the ward has an effect on the rate of falls or reduces the risk of falling (very low-quality evidence). We are uncertain of the effect of bed alarms on the rate of falls or risk of falling (very low-quality evidence). Multifactorial interventions may reduce the rate of falls, although this is more likely in a rehabilitation or geriatric ward setting (low-quality evidence). We are uncertain of the effect of these interventions on risk of falling.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Age Ageing
                Age Ageing
                ageing
                Age and Ageing
                Oxford University Press
                0002-0729
                1468-2834
                May 2022
                06 May 2022
                06 May 2022
                : 51
                : 5
                : afac077
                Affiliations
                [1 ] La Trobe University Academic and Research Collaborative in Health , Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
                [2 ] The Victorian Rehabilitation Centre , Healthscope, Glen Waverley, Victoria, Australia
                [3 ] School of Allied Health , Human Services and Sport, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia
                [4 ] Western Australian Centre for Health & Ageing , School of Allied Health, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia
                [5 ] School of Primary and Allied Health Care , Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
                [6 ] Australian Centre for Health Services Innovation and Centre for Healthcare Transformation , School of Public Health & Social Work, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia Australia
                [7 ] Digital Health and Informatics Directorate , Metro South Health, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
                [8 ] Holmesglen Institute and Monash University , Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
                [9 ] Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center , Malcom Randall VAMC, Department of Epidemiology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
                [10 ] Department of Epidemiology , University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
                [11 ] Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health , Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
                [12 ] Silver Chain , Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
                [13 ] John Walsh Centre for Rehabilitation Research , Northern Sydney Local Health District and The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
                Author notes
                Address correspondence to: Meg E. Morris, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria 3186, Australia. Email: m.morris@ 123456latrobe.edu.au

                Joint first authors.

                Article
                afac077
                10.1093/ageing/afac077
                9078046
                35524748
                3193efe8-700d-42c6-b3a3-4de6491f8342
                © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Geriatrics Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com

                History
                : 17 November 2021
                : 11 February 2022
                Page count
                Pages: 12
                Funding
                Funded by: National Health and Medical Research Council, DOI 10.13039/501100000925;
                Award ID: #1161138
                Funded by: Royal Perth Hospital Medical Research Foundation, DOI 10.13039/100012505;
                Award ID: S01/2021
                Funded by: National Health and Medical Research Council, DOI 10.13039/501100000925;
                Award ID: 1152853
                Categories
                AcademicSubjects/MED00280
                ageing/10
                ageing/11
                ageing/7
                ageing/15
                ageing/19
                Review

                Geriatric medicine
                falls,hospital,physiotherapy,prevention,education,exercise,older people,systematic review
                Geriatric medicine
                falls, hospital, physiotherapy, prevention, education, exercise, older people, systematic review

                Comments

                Comment on this article