BACKGROUND: Falls are a major cause of disability, dependence, and death in older people. Brief screening algorithms may be helpful in identifying risk and leading to more detailed assessment. Our aim was to determine the most effective sequence of falls screening test items from a wide selection of recommended items including self-report and performance tests, and to compare performance with other published guidelines. METHODS: Data were from a prospective, age-stratified, cohort study. Participants were 1002 community-dwelling women aged 65 years old or older, experiencing at least some mild disability. Assessments of fall risk factors were conducted in participants' homes. Fall outcomes were collected at 6 monthly intervals. Algorithms were built for prediction of any fall over a 12-month period using tree classification with cross-set validation. RESULTS: Algorithms using performance tests provided the best prediction of fall events, and achieved moderate to strong performance when compared to commonly accepted benchmarks. The items selected by the best performing algorithm were the number of falls in the last year and, in selected subpopulations, frequency of difficulty balancing while walking, a 4 m walking speed test, body mass index, and a test of knee extensor strength. The algorithm performed better than that from the American Geriatric Society/British Geriatric Society/American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and other guidance, although these findings should be treated with caution. CONCLUSIONS: Suggestions are made on the type, number, and sequence of tests that could be used to maximize estimation of the probability of falling in older disabled women.
BACKGROUND: Falls are a major cause of disability, dependence, and death in older people. Brief screening algorithms may be helpful in identifying risk and leading to more detailed assessment. Our aim was to determine the most effective sequence of falls screening test items from a wide selection of recommended items including self-report and performance tests, and to compare performance with other published guidelines. METHODS: Data were from a prospective, age-stratified, cohort study. Participants were 1002 community-dwelling women aged 65 years old or older, experiencing at least some mild disability. Assessments of fall risk factors were conducted in participants' homes. Fall outcomes were collected at 6 monthly intervals. Algorithms were built for prediction of any fall over a 12-month period using tree classification with cross-set validation. RESULTS: Algorithms using performance tests provided the best prediction of fall events, and achieved moderate to strong performance when compared to commonly accepted benchmarks. The items selected by the best performing algorithm were the number of falls in the last year and, in selected subpopulations, frequency of difficulty balancing while walking, a 4 m walking speed test, body mass index, and a test of knee extensor strength. The algorithm performed better than that from the American Geriatric Society/British Geriatric Society/American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and other guidance, although these findings should be treated with caution. CONCLUSIONS: Suggestions are made on the type, number, and sequence of tests that could be used to maximize estimation of the probability of falling in older disabled women.
Authors: Julie Loebach Wetherell; Kristen Johnson; Douglas Chang; Samuel R Ward; Emily S Bower; Caroline Merz; Andrew J Petkus Journal: Int J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2016-01-04 Impact factor: 3.485
Authors: Christopher R Carpenter; Manish N Shah; Fredric M Hustey; Kennon Heard; Lowell W Gerson; Douglas K Miller Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2011-04-17 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Marcela Davalos-Bichara; Frank R Lin; John P Carey; Jeremy D Walston; Jennifer E Fairman; Michael C Schubert; Jeremy S Barron; Jennifer Hughes; Jennifer L Millar; Anne Spar; Kristy L Weber; Howard S Ying; Kathleen M Zackowski; David S Zee; Yuri Agrawal Journal: J Geriatr Phys Ther Date: 2013 Apr-Jun Impact factor: 3.381
Authors: Susan W Muir-Hunter; Jennifer Clark; Stephanie McLean; Sam Pedlow; Alysia Van Hemmen; Manuel Montero Odasso; Tom Overend Journal: Physiother Can Date: 2014 Impact factor: 1.037
Authors: Julie Loebach Wetherell; Emily S Bower; Kristen Johnson; Douglas G Chang; Samuel R Ward; Andrew J Petkus Journal: Am J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2018-04-12 Impact factor: 4.105
Authors: Lee A Jennings; David B Reuben; Sung-Bou Kim; Emmett Keeler; Carol P Roth; David S Zingmond; Neil S Wenger; David A Ganz Journal: Am J Manag Care Date: 2015-09-01 Impact factor: 2.229
Authors: Julie Bruce; Anower Hossain; Ranjit Lall; Emma J Withers; Susanne Finnegan; Martin Underwood; Chen Ji; Chris Bojke; Roberta Longo; Claire Hulme; Susie Hennings; Ray Sheridan; Katharine Westacott; Shvaita Ralhan; Finbarr Martin; John Davison; Fiona Shaw; Dawn A Skelton; Jonathan Treml; Keith Willett; Sarah E Lamb Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2021-05 Impact factor: 4.014