OBJECTIVES: To establish the effectiveness of a fall-prevention program in reducing falls and injurious falls in older residential care residents. DESIGN: Cluster, randomized, controlled trial. SETTING:Fourteen randomly selected residential care homes in Auckland, New Zealand. PARTICIPANTS: All older residents (n=628, 95% participation rate). INTERVENTION: Residential care staff, using existing resources, implemented systematic individualized fall-risk management for all residents using a fall-risk assessment tool, high-risk logo, and strategies to address identified risks. MEASUREMENTS: Number of residents sustaining a fall, falls, and injurious-falls incidence rates. RESULTS: During 12 months of follow-up, 103 (43%) residents in the control group and 173 (56%) residents in the intervention group fell (P<.018). There was a significantly higher incidence rate of falls in intervention homes than in control homes (incident rate ratio=1.34, 95% confidence interval=1.06-1.72) during the intervention period after adjusting for dependency level (type of home), baseline fall rate, and clustering. There was no difference in the injurious fall incidence rate or incidence of serious injuries. CONCLUSION: This fall-prevention intervention did not reduce falls or injury from falls. Low-intensity intervention may be worse than usual care.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: To establish the effectiveness of a fall-prevention program in reducing falls and injurious falls in older residential care residents. DESIGN: Cluster, randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: Fourteen randomly selected residential care homes in Auckland, New Zealand. PARTICIPANTS: All older residents (n=628, 95% participation rate). INTERVENTION: Residential care staff, using existing resources, implemented systematic individualized fall-risk management for all residents using a fall-risk assessment tool, high-risk logo, and strategies to address identified risks. MEASUREMENTS: Number of residents sustaining a fall, falls, and injurious-falls incidence rates. RESULTS: During 12 months of follow-up, 103 (43%) residents in the control group and 173 (56%) residents in the intervention group fell (P<.018). There was a significantly higher incidence rate of falls in intervention homes than in control homes (incident rate ratio=1.34, 95% confidence interval=1.06-1.72) during the intervention period after adjusting for dependency level (type of home), baseline fall rate, and clustering. There was no difference in the injurious fall incidence rate or incidence of serious injuries. CONCLUSION: This fall-prevention intervention did not reduce falls or injury from falls. Low-intensity intervention may be worse than usual care.
Authors: Carol A Giuliani; Ann L Gruber-Baldini; Nan S Park; Lori A Schrodt; Franzi Rokoske; Philip D Sloane; Sheryl Zimmerman Journal: Gerontologist Date: 2008-04
Authors: Cathleen S Colón-Emeric; Kirsten Corazzini; Eleanor S McConnell; Wei Pan; Mark Toles; Rasheeda Hall; Michael P Cary; Melissa Batchelor-Murphy; Tracey Yap; Amber L Anderson; Andrew Burd; Sathya Amarasekara; Ruth A Anderson Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2017-11-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: K Rapp; S E Lamb; J Klenk; A Kleiner; S Heinrich; H-H König; T Nikolaus; C Becker Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2009-02-24 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: Betty Haralambous; Terry P Haines; Keith Hill; Kirsten Moore; Jennifer Nitz; Andrew Robinson Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2010-02-17 Impact factor: 3.921
Authors: A E Salter; K M Khan; M G Donaldson; J C Davis; J Buchanan; R B Abu-Laban; W L Cook; S R Lord; H A McKay Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2006-02-21 Impact factor: 4.507