Mark Faul1, Judy A Stevens2, Scott M Sasser3, Lisa Alee4, Angela J Deokar2, Deborah A Kuhls5, Peter A Burke4. 1. National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, CDC, Atlanta, Georgia. Electronic address: mfaul@cdc.gov. 2. National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, CDC, Atlanta, Georgia. 3. Department of Emergency Medicine, Greenville Health System, Greenville, South Carolina. 4. Section of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, Boston Medical Center, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts. 5. Division of Acute Care Surgery, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Nevada.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Among people aged ≥65 years, falling is the leading cause of emergency department visits. Emergency medical services (EMS) are often called to help older adults who have fallen, with some requiring hospital transport. Chief aims were to determine where falls occurred and the circumstances under which patients were transported by EMS, and to identify future fall prevention opportunities. METHODS: In 2012, a total of 42 states contributed ambulatory data to the National EMS Information System, which were analyzed in 2014 and 2015. Using EMS records from 911 call events, logistic regression examined patient and environmental factors associated with older adult transport. RESULTS: Among people aged ≥65 years, falls accounted for 17% of all EMS calls. More than one in five (21%) of these emergency 911 calls did not result in a transport. Most falls occurred at home (60.2%) and residential institutions such as nursing homes (21.7%). Logistic regression showed AORs for transport were greatest among people aged ≥85 years (AOR=1.14, 95% CI=1.13, 1.16) and women (AOR=1.30, 95% CI=1.29, 1.32); for falls at residential institutions or nursing homes (AOR=3.52, 95% CI=3.46, 3.58) and in rural environments (AOR=1.15, 95% CI=1.13, 1.17); and where the EMS impression was a stroke (AOR=2.96, 95% CI=2.11, 4.10), followed by hypothermia (AOR=2.36, 95% CI=1.33, 4.43). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides unique insight into fall circumstances and EMS transport activity. EMS personnel are in a prime position to provide interventions that can prevent future falls, or referrals to community-based fall prevention programs and services. Published by Elsevier Inc.
INTRODUCTION: Among people aged ≥65 years, falling is the leading cause of emergency department visits. Emergency medical services (EMS) are often called to help older adults who have fallen, with some requiring hospital transport. Chief aims were to determine where falls occurred and the circumstances under which patients were transported by EMS, and to identify future fall prevention opportunities. METHODS: In 2012, a total of 42 states contributed ambulatory data to the National EMS Information System, which were analyzed in 2014 and 2015. Using EMS records from 911 call events, logistic regression examined patient and environmental factors associated with older adult transport. RESULTS: Among people aged ≥65 years, falls accounted for 17% of all EMS calls. More than one in five (21%) of these emergency 911 calls did not result in a transport. Most falls occurred at home (60.2%) and residential institutions such as nursing homes (21.7%). Logistic regression showed AORs for transport were greatest among people aged ≥85 years (AOR=1.14, 95% CI=1.13, 1.16) and women (AOR=1.30, 95% CI=1.29, 1.32); for falls at residential institutions or nursing homes (AOR=3.52, 95% CI=3.46, 3.58) and in rural environments (AOR=1.15, 95% CI=1.13, 1.17); and where the EMS impression was a stroke (AOR=2.96, 95% CI=2.11, 4.10), followed by hypothermia (AOR=2.36, 95% CI=1.33, 4.43). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides unique insight into fall circumstances and EMS transport activity. EMS personnel are in a prime position to provide interventions that can prevent future falls, or referrals to community-based fall prevention programs and services. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Authors: Stephanie S Poe; Maria Cvach; Patricia B Dawson; Harriet Straus; Elizabeth E Hill Journal: J Nurs Care Qual Date: 2007 Oct-Dec Impact factor: 1.597
Authors: A Stefanie Mikolaizak; Paul M Simpson; Anne Tiedemann; Stephen R Lord; Jacqueline C T Close Journal: Australas J Ageing Date: 2013-04-17 Impact factor: 2.111
Authors: Judy A Lowthian; Damien J Jolley; Andrea J Curtis; Alexander Currell; Peter A Cameron; Johannes U Stoelwinder; John J McNeil Journal: Med J Aust Date: 2011-06-06 Impact factor: 7.738
Authors: Judy A Stevens; Michael F Ballesteros; Karin A Mack; Rose A Rudd; Erin DeCaro; Gerald Adler Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2012-07 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Philippa A Logan; C A C Coupland; J R F Gladman; O Sahota; V Stoner-Hobbs; K Robertson; V Tomlinson; M Ward; T Sach; A J Avery Journal: BMJ Date: 2010-05-11
Authors: Brooke L Namboodri; Tony Rosen; Joseph A Dayaa; Jason J Bischof; Nadeem Ramadan; Mehul D Patel; Joseph Grover; Jane H Brice; Timothy F Platts-Mills Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2018-03-22 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Christopher S Evans; Timothy F Platts-Mills; Antonio R Fernandez; Joseph M Grover; Jose G Cabanas; Mehul D Patel; Gary M Vilke; Jane H Brice Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2017-05-27 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Matthew Lee Smith; Samuel D Towne; Audry S Motlagh; Donald R Smith; Ali Boolani; Scott A Horel; Marcia G Ory Journal: Front Public Health Date: 2017-03-16
Authors: Sabine E Lemoyne; Hanne H Herbots; Dennis De Blick; Roy Remmen; Koenraad G Monsieurs; Peter Van Bogaert Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2019-01-21 Impact factor: 3.921