A randomized controlled trial of a multifactorial falls prevention intervention for older fallers presenting to emergency departments

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effect of a referral‐based targeted multifactorial falls prevention intervention on the occurrence of recurrent falls and injuries in older people presenting to an emergency department (ED) after a fall and discharged directly home from the ED. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. Assessors of outcomes were unaware of group allocation. SETTING: Seven EDs in metropolitan Melbourne, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Inclusion criteria were community dwelling, aged 60 and older, presenting to an ED after a fall, and discharged directly home. Exclusion criteria were unable to follow simple instructions or walk independently. INTERVENTION: Targeted referrals to existing community services and health promotion recommendations, based on the falls risk factors found in a baseline assessment. MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcome measures were falls and resultant injuries occurring over the 12‐month follow‐up period. Falls and injury data were collected using falls calendars supported by medical record reviews. RESULTS: Three hundred sixty‐one participants were randomized to the standard care group and 351 to the intervention group. No significant difference was found between the two groups over the 12‐month follow‐up period in number of fallers (relative risk (RR)=1.11, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.95–1.31] or number of participants sustaining an injury from a fall (RR=1.06, 95% CI=0.86–1.29). CONCLUSION: This study does not support the use of a referral‐based targeted multifactorial intervention program to reduce subsequent falls or fall injuries in older people who present to an ED after a fall.     

Prevention of falls and fall-related fractures in community-dwelling older adults: a meta-analysis of estimates of effectiveness based on recent guidelines

Abstract Background: Two recent falls prevention guidelines have been published but did not include quantitative estimates of effectiveness based on the published reports that were reviewed to support their recommendations. Aim: To produce quantitative estimates of effectiveness of falls prevention programs from the randomised controlled trials cited in the guidelines together with an updated search of the available published reports to August 2002. Methods: A meta‐analysis of randomised controlled trials cited in falls guidelines and studies identified by an updated search of the available published reports was carried out. Randomised controlled trials were identified from the falls guidelines and a search, which met the following criteria: trials in community‐dwelling older people; 1‐year follow up; and outcome measures reported as the number of subjects with at least one fall or the number of subjects with a fracture. Results: The guidelines identified four studies of ‘exercise as a sole intervention’, which when combined with one further study identified in a search of the published reports, gave a fixed effects odds ratio (OR) favouring this strategy of 0.81 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58–1.14); the number of patients needed to be treated to prevent one person having a fall was 19.5. The guidelines identified seven studies of a ‘multiple intervention’ strategy that gave a random effects OR favouring this strategy of 0.64 (95% CI 0.47–0.88). Four further studies were identified by the search of the published reports. The updated OR favouring this intervention strategy was 0.65 (95% CI 0.52–0.81); the number of patients needed to be treated to prevent one person having a fall was 9.8. Only two studies had data for fracture and a fixed effects OR favouring falls interventions for fracture prevention was 0.50 (95% CI 0.18–1.40); the number of patients needed to be treated to prevent one person having a fracture was 45.5. Conclusion: Semiquantitative statements of evidence can both understate and overstate the effectiveness of falls prevention strategies. There is moderate evidence of efficacy for falls prevention particularly for multiple intervention strategies. (Intern Med J 2004; 34: 102–108)     

Home care clients’ participation in fall prevention activities

Objective: To determine whether home care clients have accessed or been influenced by fall prevention programs. Methods: Mail survey of 4743 home care clients from several home care agencies. Results: Among the clients, 47.2% completed the survey and 46% had fallen within the last year. Faller and non‐fallers differed in attitude to falls and fall risk factors. Only 15% of fallers and 7% of non‐fallers had taken part in a fall prevention program and only 8% knew how to access information about such activities. Conclusions: Fall prevention strategies should be targeted at the home care population. Such programs should take into consideration the specific needs of this group.     

Patients with recurrent falls attending Accident & Emergency benefit from multifactorial intervention--a randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness of multifactorial intervention to prevent falls in cognitively intact older persons with recurrent falls. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial of multifactorial (medical, physiotherapy and occupational therapy) post-fall assessment and intervention compared with conventional care. SETTING: Accident & Emergency departments in a university teaching hospital and associated district general hospital. SUBJECTS: 313 cognitively intact men and women aged over 65 years presenting to Accident & Emergency with a fall or fall-related injury and at least one additional fall in the preceding year; 159 randomised to assessment and intervention and 154 to conventional care. Outcome measures: primary outcome was the number of falls and fallers in 1 year after recruitment. Secondary outcomes included injury rates, fall-related hospital admissions, mortality and fear of falling. RESULTS: There were 36% fewer falls in the intervention group (relative risk 0.64, 95% confidence interval 0.46-0.90). The proportion of subjects continuing to fall (65% (94/144) compared with 68% (102/149) relative risk 0.95, 95% confidence interval 0.81-1.12), and the number of fall-related attendances and hospital admissions was not different between groups. Duration of hospital admission was reduced (mean difference admission duration 3.6 days, 95% confidence interval 0.1-7.6) and falls efficacy was better in the intervention group (mean difference in Activities Specific Balance Confidence Score of 7.5, 95% confidence interval 0.72-14.2). CONCLUSION: Multifactorial intervention is effective at reducing the fall burden in cognitively intact older persons with recurrent falls attending Accident & Emergency, but does not reduce the proportion of subjects still falling.     

Effective Exercise for the Prevention of Falls: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of exercise on falls prevention in older people and establish whether particular trial characteristics or components of exercise programs are associated with larger reductions in falls. DESIGN: Systematic review with meta‐analysis. Randomized controlled trials that compared fall rates in older people who undertook exercise programs with fall rates in those who did not exercise were included. SETTING: Older people. PARTICIPANTS: General community and residential care. MEASUREMENTS: Fall rates. RESULTS: The pooled estimate of the effect of exercise was that it reduced the rate of falling by 17% (44 trials with 9,603 participants, rate ratio (RR)=0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.75–0.91, P<.001, I²=62%). The greatest relative effects of exercise on fall rates (RR=0.58, 95% CI=0.48–0.69, 68% of between‐study variability explained) were seen in programs that included a combination of a higher total dose of exercise (>50 hours over the trial period) and challenging balance exercises (exercises conducted while standing in which people aimed to stand with their feet closer together or on one leg, minimize use of their hands to assist, and practice controlled movements of the center of mass) and did not include a walking program. CONCLUSION: Exercise can prevent falls in older people. Greater relative effects are seen in programs that include exercises that challenge balance, use a higher dose of exercise, and do not include a walking program. Service providers can use these findings to design and implement exercise programs for falls prevention.     

Prevention of fall and fracture

Many programs to prevent falls were designed for intervention in fall risk factors. Several meta-analyses, based on many randomized, controlled trials and conducted for the purpose of evaluating the efficacy of these interventions, have been published recently. According to these studies, multifactorial fall risk assessment and management, as well as muscle strengthening and balance retraining, succeeded in reducing falls by approximately 10-38%. Only New Zealand trials were found to decrease even injurious falls, with reduction of moderate or serious injuries by 35% using fall prevention. However, there was no significant difference between the two groups when looking at only serious injuries such as fractures. Thus, fall prevention can prevent falls, but not fractures at present.     

Fall and injury prevention in residential care--effects in residents with higher and lower levels of cognition

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of a multifactorial fall and injury prevention program in older people with higher and lower levels of cognition. DESIGN: A preplanned subgroup comparison of the effectiveness of a cluster‐randomized, nonblinded, usual‐care, controlled trial. SETTING: Nine residential facilities in Umeå, Sweden. PARTICIPANTS: All consenting residents living in the facilities, aged 65 and older, who could be assessed using the Mini‐Mental State Examination (MMSE; n = 378). An MMSE score of 19 was used to divide the sample into one group with lower and one with higher level of cognition. The lower MMSE group was older (mean ± standard deviation = 83.9 ± 5.8 vs 82.2 ± 7.5) and more functionally impaired (Barthel Index, median (interquartile range) 11 (6–15) vs 17 (13–18)) and had a higher risk of falling (64% vs 36%) than the higher MMSE group. INTERVENTION: A multifactorial fall prevention program comprising staff education, environmental adjustment, exercise, drug review, aids, hip protectors, and postfall problem‐solving conferences. MEASUREMENTS: The number of falls, time to first fall, and number of injuries were evaluated and compared by study group (intervention vs control) and by MMSE group. RESULTS: A significant intervention effect on falls appeared in the higher MMSE group but not in the lower MMSE group (adjusted incidence rates ratio of falls P = .016 and P = .121 and adjusted hazard ratio P < .001 and P = .420, respectively). In the lower MMSE group, 10 femoral fractures were found, all of which occurred in the control group (P = .006). CONCLUSION: The higher MMSE group experienced fewer falls after this multifactorial intervention program, whereas the lower MMSE group did not respond as well to the intervention, but femoral fractures were reduced in the lower MMSE group.     

The effect of changing practice on fall prevention in a rehabilitative hospital: the Hospital Injury Prevention Study

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether a change in practice to introduce a multidisciplinary fall-prevention program can reduce falls and injury in nonacute patients in a rehabilitation hospital. DESIGN: A quasi-experimental study. SETTING: Three geriatric wards with a similar design, equipment, staffing levels, and skill mix. PARTICIPANTS: Eight hundred twenty-five consecutive patients. INTERVENTION: The patients' fall-risk status was assessed using the Downton Score. Current practice was maintained on the two control wards (n=550). On the experimental ward (n=275), a fall-prevention program was introduced. A multidisciplinary team met weekly specifically to discuss patients' fall risk and formulate a targeted plan. Patients at risk were identified using wristbands; risk factors were corrected or environmental changes made to enhance safety. MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcomes were number of fallers, recurrent fallers, total falls, patients sustaining injury, and falls per occupied bed days. Secondary outcomes were place of discharge and mortality. RESULTS: Patients were matched for age and risk status. Control wards had proportionally more fallers (20.2% vs 14.2%: P=.033), patients sustaining injury (8.2% vs 4%: P=.025), and total number of falls (170 vs 72: P=.045). These results did not remain significant after controlling for differing length of stay. There was no reduction in recurrent fallers (6.4% vs 4.7%: P=.43) and no effect on place of discharge (home discharges; 57.5% vs 60.7%: P=.41) or mortality (15.3% vs 13.8%: P=.60). CONCLUSION: This study shows that falls might be reduced in a multidisciplinary fall-prevention program, but the results are not definitive because of the borderline significance achieved and the variable length of stay. More research on fall prevention in hospital is required, particularly as to what interventions, if any, are effective at reducing falls in this group of patients.     

Does vitamin D stop inpatients falling? A randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Vitamin D deficiency is common in older people and may increase risk of falls and fracture. Hospital inpatients are at particular risk of falling. Previous studies suggest that vitamin D improves neuromuscular function and reduces falls. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether routine supplementation with vitamin D plus calcium reduces numbers of fallers and falls in a cohort of hospital admissions while they are inpatients. DESIGN: Randomised, double-blind, controlled study. Participants: two hundred and five acute admissions >65 years to a geriatric medical unit. METHODS: Patients were randomised to intervention of daily vitamin D 800 iu plus calcium 1,200 mg or control group of daily calcium 1,200 mg, until discharge or death. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar in both groups with a median age 84 years and a median length of stay = 30 days (IQR 14.75-71.00). In a pre-selected sub-group (54/205 participants), median admission vitamin D level = 22.00 nmol/l (IQR 15.00-30.50). This did not significantly increase in the treatment versus control group. Median study drug adherence = 88%, with no significant difference between study groups (Mann-Whitney: P = 0.711). Although there were fewer fallers in the vitamin D cohort, this did not reach statistical significance (vitamin D: calcium = 36:45 fallers; RR 0.82 (CI 0.59-1.16). Neither the mean number of falls (vitamin D: calcium = 1.040:1.155; Mann-Whitney P = 0.435) or time to first fall (Log-rank test P = 0.377) differed between groups. CONCLUSIONS: In a population of geriatric hospital inpatients, vitamin D did not reduce the number of fallers. Routine supplementation cannot be recommended to reduce falls in this group.     

Incidence of in-hospital falls in geriatric patients before and after the introduction of an interdisciplinary team-based fall-prevention intervention

Falls are among the most common unwanted events in older hospital inpatients, but evidence of effective prevention is still limited compared with that in the community and in long-term care facilities. This article describes a prevention program and its effects on the incidence of falls in geriatric hospital wards. It was a prospective cohort study with historical control including all 4,272 patients (mean age 80, 69% female) before and 2,982 (mean age 81, 69% female) after introduction of the intervention. The intervention included fall-risk assessment on admission and reassessment after a fall; risk alert; additional supervision and assistance with the patients' transfer and use of the toilet; provision of an information leaflet; individual patient and caregiver counseling; encouragement of appropriate use of eyeglasses, hearing aids, footwear, and mobility devices; and staff education. Measurements included standardized fall-incidence reporting, activity of daily living and mobility status, number of falls and injurious falls, and number of patients who fell. Before the intervention was introduced, 893 falls were recorded. After the intervention was implemented, only 468 falls were recorded (incidence rate ratio (IRR)=0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.73–0.92), 240 versus 129 total injurious falls (IRR=0.84, 95% CI=0.67–1.04), 10 versus nine falls with fracture (IRR=1.40, 95% CI=0.51–3.85) and 611 versus 330 fallers. The relative risk of falling was significantly reduced (0.77, 95% CI=0.68–0.88). A structured multifactorial intervention reduced the incidence of falls, but not injurious falls, in a hospital ward setting with existing geriatric multidisciplinary care. Improvement of functional competence and mobility may be relevant to fall prevention in older hospital inpatients.     

An Outpatient Multifactorial Falls Prevention Intervention Does Not Reduce Falls in High-Risk Elderly Danes

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of multifactorial fall prevention in community-dwelling people aged 65 and older in Denmark.
DESIGN: Randomized, controlled clinical trial.
SETTING: Geriatric outpatient clinic at Glostrup University Hospital.
PARTICIPANTS: Three hundred ninety-two elderly people, mean age 74, 73.7% women, who had visited the emergency department or had been hospitalized due to a fall.
INTERVENTION: Identification of general medical, cardiovascular, and physical risk factors for falls and individual intervention in the intervention group. Participants in the control group received usual care.
MEASUREMENTS: Falls were registered prospectively in falls diaries, with monthly telephone calls for collection of data. Outcomes were fall rates and proportion of participants with falls, frequent falls, and injurious falls in 12 months.
RESULTS: Groups were comparable at baseline. Follow-up exceeded 90.0%. A total of 422 falls were registered in the intervention group, 398 in the control group. Intention-to-treat analysis revealed no effect of the intervention on fall rates (relative risk=1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.75–1.51), proportion with falls (odds ratio (OR)=1.20, 95% CI 0.81–1.79), frequent falls (OR=0.97, 95% CI=0.60–1.56), or injurious falls (OR=0.97, 95% CI=0.57–1.62).
CONCLUSION: A program of multifactorial fall prevention aimed at elderly Danish people experiencing at least one injurious fall was not effective in preventing further falls.     

Evaluating the Cost-Effectiveness of Fall Prevention Programs that Reduce Fall-Related Hip Fractures in Older Adults

OBJECTIVES: To model the incremental cost‐utility of seven interventions reported as effective for preventing falls in older adults. DESIGN: Mathematical epidemiological model populated by data based on direct clinical experience and a critical review of the literature. SETTING: Model represents population level interventions. PARTICIPANTS: No human subjects were involved in the study. MEASUREMENS: The last Cochrane database review and meta‐analyses of randomized controlled trials categorized effective fall‐prevention interventions into seven groups: medical management (withdrawal) of psychotropics, group tai chi, vitamin D supplementation, muscle and balance exercises, home modifications, multifactorial individualized programs for all elderly people, and multifactorial individualized treatments for high‐risk frail elderly people. Fall‐related hip fracture incidence was obtained from the literature. Salary figures for health professionals were based on Bureau of Labor Statistics data. Using an integrated healthcare system perspective, healthcare costs were estimated based on practice and studies on falls in older adults. Base case incremental cost utility ratios were calculated, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Medical management of psychotropics and group tai chi were the least‐costly, most‐effective options, but they were also the least studied. Excluding these interventions, the least‐expensive, most‐effective options are vitamin D supplementation and home modifications. Vitamin D supplementation costs less than home modifications, but home modifications cost only $14,794/quality‐adjusted life year (QALY) gained more than vitamin D. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses excluding management of psychotropics and tai chi, home modification is most likely to have the highest economic benefit when QALYs are valued at $50,000 or $100,000. CONCLUSION: Of single interventions studied, management of psychotropics and tai chi reduces costs the most. Of more‐studied interventions, home modifications provide the best value. These results must be interpreted in the context of the multifactorial nature of falls.     

Translating a Multifactorial Fall Prevention Intervention into Practice: A Controlled Evaluation of a Fall Prevention Clinic

Although multifactorial fall prevention interventions have been shown to reduce falls and injurious falls, their translation into clinical settings has been limited. This article describes a hospital‐based fall prevention clinic established to increase availability of preventive care for falls. Outcomes for 43 adults aged 65 and older seen during the clinic's first 6 months of operation were compared with outcomes for 86 age‐, sex‐, and race‐matched controls; all persons included in analyses received primary care at the hospital's geriatrics clinic. Nonsignificant differences in falls, injurious falls, and fall‐related healthcare use according to study group in multivariate adjusted models were observed, probably because of the small, fixed sample size. The percentage experiencing any injurious falls during the follow‐up period was comparable for fall clinic visitors and controls (14% vs 13%), despite a dramatic difference at baseline (42% of clinic visitors vs 15% of controls). Fall‐related healthcare use was higher for clinic visitors during the baseline period (21%, vs 12% for controls) and decreased slightly (to 19%) during follow‐up; differences in fall‐related healthcare use according to study group from baseline to follow‐up were nonsignificant. These findings, although preliminary because of the small sample size and the baseline difference between the groups in fall rates, suggest that being seen in a fall prevention clinic may reduce injurious falls. Additional studies will be necessary to conclusively determine the effects of multifactorial fall risk assessment and management delivered by midlevel providers working in real‐world clinical practice settings on key outcomes, including injurious falls, downstream fall‐related healthcare use, and costs.     

Vitamin D Treatment for the Prevention of Falls in Older Adults: Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

OBJECTIVES: To systematically review and quantitatively synthesize the effect of vitamin D therapy on fall prevention in older adults. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta‐analysis. SETTING: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, LILACS, bibliographies of selected articles, and previous systematic reviews through February 2009 were searched for eligible studies. PARTICIPANTS: Older adults (aged ≥60) who participated in randomized controlled trials that both investigated the effectiveness of vitamin D therapy in the prevention of falls and used an explicit fall definition. MEASUREMENTS: Two authors independently extracted data, including study characteristics, quality assessment, and outcomes. The I² statistic was used to assess heterogeneity in a random‐effects model. RESULTS: Of 1,679 potentially relevant articles, 10 met inclusion criteria. In pooled analysis, vitamin D therapy (200–1,000 IU) resulted in 14% (relative risk (RR)=0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.79–0.93; I²=7%) fewer falls than calcium or placebo (number needed to treat =15). The following subgroups had significantly fewer falls: community‐dwelling (aged <80), adjunctive calcium supplementation, no history of fractures or falls, duration longer than 6 months, cholecalciferol, and dose of 800 IU or greater. Meta‐regression demonstrated no linear association between vitamin D dose or duration and treatment effect. Post hoc analysis including seven additional studies (17 total) without explicit fall definitions yielded smaller benefit (RR=0.92, 95% CI=0.87–0.98) and more heterogeneity (I²=36%) but found significant intergroup differences favoring adjunctive calcium over none (P=.001). CONCLUSION: Vitamin D treatment effectively reduces the risk of falls in older adults. Future studies should investigate whether particular populations or treatment regimens may have greater benefit.     

Prevalence,outcome and risk for falling in 155 ambulatory patients with rheumatic disease

Aim: Older people are at greater risk of falls and fall‐related adverse outcomes. Risk for falls is multifactorial, and relative importance of risk factors (RF) may vary according to the population studied. Although several population studies identify musculoskeletal factors as one of many RFs, there have been few studies of falls in populations with rheumatic disease. In this study we aim to assess the incidence of falls, prevalence of falls RFs and outcomes of falls in an ambulatory population with rheumatic disease. Methods: Using a retrospective cohort study design, consecutive patients attending rheumatology outpatient clinics completed a self‐administered falls questionnaire that investigated falls within the previous 12 months, risk for falling and fear of falling. Results: One hundred and fifty‐five patients, with a mean age of 59.7 years (SD 15.0) completed the survey. Seventy‐six patients (49%) reported one or more falls in the previous 12 months. Fifty‐eight (76.3%) reported an adverse outcome which included fracture in 12 (15.8%) and hospital attendance or admission in 20 (26.7%). Fear of falling was also common, being reported in 81 (52.3%) patients. Moderately or severe fear of falling was reported in 26 (16.8%) among the whole group and in 10% of the 78 patients who had not yet experienced a fall. Conclusions: The findings of this study highlight the high incidence of falls and fear of falling in patients with rheumatic disease and identify groups likely to be at higher risk. These patients should be considered for falls prevention programs that have been shown to reduce falls risk and improve self‐efficacy.     

Role of physical therapists and aromatherapy for fall prevention in older people: A narrative review

Falls among older people are usually the result of several causes combined. Identifying all the fall-related factors that apply to a particular individual and providing comprehensive multifactorial intervention is recommended for the prevention of falls among older people. However, the overall net benefit of multifactorial intervention in preventing falls is small, and it does not appear to improve fall-related outcomes, such as the number of fall-related injuries. Therefore, we might require new perspectives to overcome this situation. Here, we raise two novel strategies for fall prevention among older people. One is using physical therapists more actively. The other is using aromatherapy for stabilization of older people. Physical therapists should carry out detailed gait assessment and caregiver education. Aromatherapy is effective in improving balance and mental stability in older people. To overcome refractory geriatric syndrome, there is no choice but to eliminate all preconceived ideas before choosing the best fall prevention strategies. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2021; 21: 445–450 .     

Characteristics of single fallers and recurrent fallers among hospital in-patients

BACKGROUND: Recurrent fallers constitute a minority of patients who fall but contribute considerably to the total number of falls recorded. Objective: To study the characteristics of recurrent fallers in a hospital setting. METHODS: In a prospective observational study we investigated the characteristics of 1,025 patients admitted to a geriatric non-acute hospital. Patients were followed until discharge and were classified as non-fallers, single fallers or recurrent fallers. RESULTS: We identified 824 non-fallers, 136 single fallers and 65 recurrent fallers contributing 175 falls. Compared to non-fallers, recurrent fallers were more likely to have pre-admission falls (p = 0.004), confusion (p < 0.0001), an unsafe gait (p = 0.0001) and be on tranquillisers (p = 0.018) and antidepressants (p = 0.006). They had longer stays in hospital (p < 0.0001) and more nursing home discharges (p = 0.0001). There was considerable overlap with risk factors for single fallers but compared to this group they were more likely to be confused (p = 0.027), and on antidepressant medication (p = 0.009). They also had a longer length of stay (p < 0.001) and more nursing home discharges (p = 0.03). Confusion (p = 0.0001), unsafe gait (p = 0.0006) and antidepressants (p = 0.018) were independently associated with recurrent falls. CONCLUSIONS: It is important to recognise the risk factors that prospectively identify a recurrent faller because of the significant contribution to total falls by a relatively small number of patients. This may be useful not only in trying to reduce total falls but also in trying to reduce injury.     

Effect of a Risk-Based Multifactorial Fall Prevention Program on the Incidence of Falls

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of a multifactorial fall prevention program on falls and to identify the subgroups that benefit the most.
DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial.
SETTING: Community-dwelling subjects who had fallen at least once during the previous 12 months.
PARTICIPANTS: Five hundred ninety-one subjects randomized into intervention (IG) (n=293) and control (CG) (n=298) groups.
INTERVENTION: A multifactorial 12-month fall prevention program.
MEASUREMENTS: Incidence of falls.
RESULTS: The intervention did not reduce the incidence of falls overall (incidence rate ratio (IRR) for IG vs CG=0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.72–1.19). In subgroup analyses, significant interactions between subgroups and groups (IG and CG) were found for depressive symptoms ( P =.006), number of falls during the previous 12 months ( P =.003), and self-perceived risk of falling ( P =.045). The incidence of falls decreased in subjects with a higher number of depressive symptoms (IRR=0.50, 95% CI=0.28–0.88), whereas it increased in those with a lower number of depressive symptoms (IRR=1.20, 95% CI=0.92–1.57). The incidence of falls decreased also in those with at least three previous falls (IRR=0.59, 95% CI=0.38–0.91) compared to those with one or two previous falls (IRR=1.28, 95% CI=0.95–1.72). The intervention was also more effective in subjects with high self-perceived risk of falling (IRR=0.77, 95% CI=0.55–1.06) than in those with low self-perceived risk (IRR=1.28, 95% CI=0.88–1.86).
CONCLUSION: The program was not effective in reducing falls in the total sample of community-dwelling subjects with a history of falling, but the incidence of falls decreased in participants with a higher number of depressive symptoms and in those with at least three falls.     

Do hospital fall prevention programs work? A systematic review

OBJECTIVES: To analyze published hospital fall prevention programs to determine whether there is any effect on fall rates. To review the methodological quality of those programs and the range of interventions used. To provide directions for further research. DESIGN: Systematic review of published hospital fall prevention programs. Meta-analysis. METHODS: Keyword searches of Medline, CINAHL, monographs, and secondary references. All papers were included that described fall rates before and during intervention. Risk ratios and 95% Confidence Intervals (95% CI) were estimated and random effects meta-analysis employed. Begg's test was applied to detect possible publication bias. Separate meta-analysis regressions were performed to determine whether individual components of multifaceted interventions were effective. RESULTS: A total of 21 papers met the criteria (18 from North America), although only 10 contained sufficient data to allow calculation of confidence intervals. A rate ratio of <1 indicates a reduction in the fall rate, resulting from an intervention. Three were randomized controlled trials (pooled rate ratio 1.0 (CI 0.60, 1.68)), seven prospective studies with historical control (0.76 (CI 0.65, 0.88)). Pooled effect rate ratio from these 10 studies was 0.79 (CI 0.69, 0.89). The remaining 11 studies were prospective studies with historical control describing fall rates only. Individual components of interventions showed no significant benefit. DISCUSSION: The pooled effect of about 25% reduction in the fall rate may be a result of intervention but may also be biased by studies that used historical controls not allowing for historical trends in the fall rate before and during the intervention. The randomized controlled trials apparent lack of effect might be due to a change in practice when patients and controls were in the same unit at the same time during a study. Studies did not analyze compliance with the intervention or opportunity costs resulting from the intervention. Research and clinical programs in hospital fall prevention should pay more attention to study design and the nature of interventions.     

Functional mobility discriminates nonfallers from one-time and frequent fallers

BACKGROUND: Given that 90% of hip fractures result from a fall, individuals who fall frequently are more likely to be at greater risk for fracture than one-time fallers. Our aim was to determine whether performance variables associated with injurious falls could be used to distinguish frequent fallers from both one-time fallers and nonfallers. METHODS: A total of 157 men and women (77.4-5.4 years) were recruited and categorized into one of the following three groups based on falls status over the previous 12 months: nonfallers (n = 48), one-time fallers (n = 56), and frequent fallers (more than one fall) (n = 53). All subjects were evaluated on functional mobility and lower extremity strength and power. RESULTS: Using multivariate analysis of covariance with height as a covariate, nonfallers were significantly faster than both one-time and frequent fallers during the Get Up and Go (a test involving lower extremity strength and power, and mobility) and faster than one-time fallers on the Tandem Gait (p < .01). There were no significant differences between groups for other mobility variables or for laboratory measures of strength and power. Because one-time and frequent fallers were similar on all measures. they were grouped as "fallers" in discriminant analysis. The Get Up and Go discriminated between the fallers and nonfallers with a final Wilks's Lambda of .900 (p < .001) and correctly classified 72.4% of fallers and nonfallers before crossvalidation and 71.2% of the cases after validation. CONCLUSIONS: Given that the Get Up and Go discriminates between fallers and nonfallers and is associated with lower extremity strength and power, fall prevention strategies should focus on improving both functional mobility and lower extremity strength and power.