Literature DB >> 19682128

Baseline and follow-up characteristics of participants and nonparticipants in a randomized clinical trial of multifactorial fall prevention in Denmark.

Ane B Vind1, Hanne E Andersen, Kirsten D Pedersen, Torben Jørgensen, Peter Schwarz.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To address the external validity of a trial of multifactorial fall prevention through an analysis of differences between participants and nonparticipants regarding socioeconomic and morbidity variables.
DESIGN: Analysis of nonresponse in a randomized clinical trial.
SETTING: Geriatric outpatient department. PARTICIPANTS: One thousand one hundred five community-dwelling adults aged 65 and older who had sustained at least one injurious fall. MEASUREMENTS: Marital status, housing tenure, income, comorbidity, hospitalization, fractures, and drug use before invitation to participate in the trial. Fractures, hospitalization and death were measured for 6 months of follow-up.
RESULTS: Four hundred forty-seven responding nonparticipants and 266 nonresponding nonparticipants were compared with 392 participants in the trial. Lower income (odds ratio (OR)=2.38, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.28-4.28) and more days of hospitalization during the previous 5 years (OR=1.96, 95% CI=1.15-3.33) predicted responding nonparticipation; independent predictors of being a nonresponding nonparticipant were unmarried status (OR=2.0, 95% CI=1.36-2.94), lower income (OR=4.74, 95% CI=2.30-9.78), more days of hospitalization (OR=3.49, 95% CI=1.99-6.11), and prior fractures (OR=1.56, 95% CI=1.02-2.38). Nonresponding nonparticipants were significantly more likely to die (OR=12.99, 95% CI=1.6-105.6) or be hospitalized (OR=2.66, 95% CI=1.7-4.1) than participants during 6 months of follow-up.
CONCLUSION: Nonresponding nonparticipants of a trial of multifactorial fall prevention differed significantly from participants in terms of socioeconomic and morbidity variables and were more likely to be hospitalized or die during 6 months of follow-up. Because of the differences between the two populations, it is questionable whether results from this randomized trial can be generalized to people potentially eligible for participation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19682128     DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2009.02435.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc        ISSN: 0002-8614            Impact factor:   5.562


  10 in total

1.  [Back pain and social status among the working population: what is the association? Results from a German general population survey].

Authors:  C O Schmidt; J Moock; R A Fahland; Y Y-S Feng; T Kohlmann
Journal:  Schmerz       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 1.107

Review 2.  Outcomes for patients with the same disease treated inside and outside of randomized trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Natasha Fernandes; Dianne Bryant; Lauren Griffith; Mohamed El-Rabbany; Nisha M Fernandes; Crystal Kean; Jacquelyn Marsh; Siddhi Mathur; Rebecca Moyer; Clare J Reade; John J Riva; Lyndsay Somerville; Neera Bhatnagar
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2014-09-29       Impact factor: 8.262

3.  Generalizability and reach of a randomized controlled trial to improve oral health among home care recipients: comparing participants and nonparticipants at baseline and during follow-up.

Authors:  Jonas Czwikla; Alexandra Herzberg; Sonja Kapp; Stephan Kloep; Heinz Rothgang; Ina Nitschke; Cornelius Haffner; Falk Hoffmann
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2022-07-08       Impact factor: 2.728

Review 4.  Interventions for preventing falls in older people living in the community.

Authors:  Lesley D Gillespie; M Clare Robertson; William J Gillespie; Catherine Sherrington; Simon Gates; Lindy M Clemson; Sarah E Lamb
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2012-09-12

5.  Danish register-based study on the association between specific cardiovascular drugs and fragility fractures.

Authors:  Maia Torstensson; Annette Højmann Hansen; Katja Leth-Møller; Terese Sara Høj Jørgensen; Marie Sahlberg; Charlotte Andersson; Karl Emil Kristensen; Jesper Ryg; Peter Weeke; Christian Torp-Pedersen; Gunnar Gislason; Ellen Holm
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2015-12-29       Impact factor: 2.692

6.  Baseline participation in a health examination survey of the population 65 years and older: who is missed and why?

Authors:  Beate Gaertner; Ina Seitz; Judith Fuchs; Markus A Busch; Martin Holzhausen; Peter Martus; Christa Scheidt-Nave
Journal:  BMC Geriatr       Date:  2016-01-19       Impact factor: 3.921

7.  Motivations for (non)participation in population-based health studies among the elderly - comparison of participants and nonparticipants of a prospective study on influenza vaccination.

Authors:  Manas K Akmatov; Leonhard Jentsch; Peggy Riese; Marcus May; Malik W Ahmed; Damaris Werner; Anja Rösel; Jana Prokein; Inga Bernemann; Norman Klopp; Blair Prochnow; Thomas Illig; Christoph Schindler; Carlos A Guzman; Frank Pessler
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2017-02-02       Impact factor: 4.615

Review 8.  Multifactorial and multiple component interventions for preventing falls in older people living in the community.

Authors:  Sally Hopewell; Olubusola Adedire; Bethan J Copsey; Graham J Boniface; Catherine Sherrington; Lindy Clemson; Jacqueline Ct Close; Sarah E Lamb
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2018-07-23

9.  The Importance of Risk and Subgroup Analysis of Nonparticipants in a Geriatric Intervention Study.

Authors:  Elizabeth Rosted; Ingrid Poulsen; Carsten Hendriksen; Lis Wagner
Journal:  Scientifica (Cairo)       Date:  2016-06-30

10.  Personal preferences of participation in fall prevention programmes: a descriptive study.

Authors:  Lotte M Barmentloo; Branko F Olij; Vicki Erasmus; Dini Smilde; Yvonne Schoon; Suzanne Polinder
Journal:  BMC Geriatr       Date:  2020-05-28       Impact factor: 3.921

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.