Susan Nunan1, Christine Brown Wilson1, Timothy Henwood2,3, Deborah Parker1,4. 1. School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 2. AgeFIT Solutions, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. 3. School of Human Movement and Nutritional Science, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 4. Centre for Applied Nursing Research and the Ingham Institute of Applied Medical Research, Western Sydney University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review of published fall risk assessment tools (FRATs) tested for predictive validity among older adults in long-term care (LTC). METHODS: A systematic search was conducted using five databases. Only studies reporting on sensitivity and specificity values, conducted in LTC on populations primarily aged over 60 years, were considered. RESULTS: Fifteen papers were included and three different categories of FRATs emerged: multifactorial assessment tools, functional mobility assessments and algorithms. Several FRATs showed moderate-to-good predictive validity and reliability, with the Modified Fall Assessment Tool and the Peninsula Health Falls Risk Assessment Tool (PHFRAT) also demonstrating good feasibility. CONCLUSION: Evidence for the best choice of FRAT for use in LTC remains limited. Further research is warranted for the PHFRAT, recommended for use in LTC by best practice guidelines, before its establishment as the tool of choice for these clinical settings.
OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review of published fall risk assessment tools (FRATs) tested for predictive validity among older adults in long-term care (LTC). METHODS: A systematic search was conducted using five databases. Only studies reporting on sensitivity and specificity values, conducted in LTC on populations primarily aged over 60 years, were considered. RESULTS: Fifteen papers were included and three different categories of FRATs emerged: multifactorial assessment tools, functional mobility assessments and algorithms. Several FRATs showed moderate-to-good predictive validity and reliability, with the Modified Fall Assessment Tool and the Peninsula Health Falls Risk Assessment Tool (PHFRAT) also demonstrating good feasibility. CONCLUSION: Evidence for the best choice of FRAT for use in LTC remains limited. Further research is warranted for the PHFRAT, recommended for use in LTC by best practice guidelines, before its establishment as the tool of choice for these clinical settings.
Authors: Richard D Boyce; Olga V Kravchenko; Subashan Perera; Jordan F Karp; Sandra L Kane-Gill; Charles F Reynolds; Steven M Albert; Steven M Handler Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2022-08-16 Impact factor: 7.942
Authors: Vanja Milosevic; Aimee Linkens; Bjorn Winkens; Kim P G M Hurkens; Dennis Wong; Brigit P C van Oijen; Hugo M van der Kuy; Carlota Mestres-Gonzalvo Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-05-03 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Roman Schniepp; Anna Huppert; Julian Decker; Fabian Schenkel; Cornelia Schlick; Atal Rasoul; Marianne Dieterich; Thomas Brandt; Klaus Jahn; Max Wuehr Journal: J Neurol Date: 2021-03-13 Impact factor: 4.849
Authors: Nasir Wabe; Joyce Siette; Karla L Seaman; Amy D Nguyen; Magdalena Z Raban; Jacqueline C T Close; Stephen R Lord; Johanna I Westbrook Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2022-04-01 Impact factor: 3.921