Dataset Information

Comparisons of Interventions for Preventing Falls in Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Falls result in substantial burden for patients and health care systems, and given the aging of the population worldwide, the incidence of falls continues to rise.

Objective

To assess the potential effectiveness of interventions for preventing falls.

Data sources

MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Ageline databases from inception until April 2017. Reference lists of included studies were scanned.

Study selection

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of fall-prevention interventions for participants aged 65 years and older.

Data extraction and synthesis

Pairs of reviewers independently screened the studies, abstracted data, and appraised risk of bias. Pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis were conducted.

Main outcomes and measures

Injurious falls and fall-related hospitalizations.

Results

A total of 283 RCTs (159 910 participants; mean age, 78.1 years; 74% women) were included after screening of 10 650 titles and abstracts and 1210 full-text articles. Network meta-analysis (including 54 RCTs, 41 596 participants, 39 interventions plus usual care) suggested that the following interventions, when compared with usual care, were associated with reductions in injurious falls: exercise (odds ratio [OR], 0.51 [95% CI, 0.33 to 0.79]; absolute risk difference [ARD], -0.67 [95% CI, -1.10 to -0.24]); combined exercise and vision assessment and treatment (OR, 0.17 [95% CI, 0.07 to 0.38]; ARD, -1.79 [95% CI, -2.63 to -0.96]); combined exercise, vision assessment and treatment, and environmental assessment and modification (OR, 0.30 [95% CI, 0.13 to 0.70]; ARD, -1.19 [95% CI, -2.04 to -0.35]); and combined clinic-level quality improvement strategies (eg, case management), multifactorial assessment and treatment (eg, comprehensive geriatric assessment), calcium supplementation, and vitamin D supplementation (OR, 0.12 [95% CI, 0.03 to 0.55]; ARD, -2.08 [95% CI, -3.56 to -0.60]). Pairwise meta-analyses for fall-related hospitalizations (2 RCTs; 516 participants) showed no significant association between combined clinic- and patient-level quality improvement strategies and multifactorial assessment and treatment relative to usual care (OR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.33 to 1.81]).

Conclusions and relevance

Exercise alone and various combinations of interventions were associated with lower risk of injurious falls compared with usual care. Choice of fall-prevention intervention may depend on patient and caregiver values and preferences.

SUBMITTER: Tricco AC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5818787 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundLimited attention has been paid in the literature to multiple component fall prevention interventions that comprise two or more fixed combinations of fall prevention interventions that are not individually tailored following a risk assessment. The study objective was to determine the effect of multiple component interventions on fall rates, number of fallers and fall-related injuries among older people and to establish effect sizes of particular intervention combinations.MethodsMedline, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsychInfo, Cochrane, AMED, UK Clinical Research Network Study Portfolio, Current Controlled Trials register and Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials register were systematically searched to August 2013 for randomised controlled trials targeting those aged 60 years and older with any medical condition or in any setting that compared multiple component interventions with no intervention, placebo or usual clinical care on the outcomes reported falls, number that fall or fall-related injuries. Included studies were appraised using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Estimates of fall rate ratio and risk ratio were pooled across studies using random effects meta-analysis. Data synthesis took place in 2013.ResultsEighteen papers reporting 17 trials were included (5034 participants). There was a reduction in the number of people that fell (pooled risk ratio = 0.85, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.80 to 0.91) and the fall rate (pooled rate ratio = 0.80, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.89) in favour of multiple component interventions when compared with controls. There was a small amount of statistical heterogeneity (I(2) =20%) across studies for fall rate and no heterogeneity across studies examining number of people that fell.ConclusionsThis systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials found evidence that multiple component interventions that are not tailored to individually assessed risk factors are effective at reducing both the number of people that fall and the fall rate. This approach should be considered as a service delivery option.

Project description:Backgroundfoot problems are independent risk factors for falls in older people. Podiatrists diagnose and treat a wide range of problems affecting the feet, ankles and lower limbs. However, the effectiveness of podiatry interventions to prevent falls in older people is unknown. This systematic review examined podiatry interventions for falls prevention delivered in the community and in care homes.Methodssystematic review and meta-analysis. We searched multiple electronic databases with no language restrictions. Randomised or quasi-randomised-controlled trials documenting podiatry interventions in older people (aged 60+) were included. Two reviewers independently applied selection criteria and assessed methodological quality using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. TiDieR guidelines guided data extraction and where suitable statistical summary data were available, we combined the selected outcome data in pooled meta-analyses.Resultsfrom 35,857 titles and 5,201 screened abstracts, nine studies involving 6,502 participants (range 40-3,727) met the inclusion criteria. Interventions were single component podiatry (two studies), multifaceted podiatry (three studies), or multifactorial involving other components and referral to podiatry component (four studies). Seven studies were conducted in the community and two in care homes. Quality assessment showed overall low risk for selection bias, but unclear or high risk of detection bias in 4/9 studies. Combining falls rate data showed significant effects for multifaceted podiatry interventions compared to usual care (falls rate ratio 0.77 [95% CI 0.61, 0.99]); and multifactorial interventions including podiatry (falls rate ratio: 0.73 [95% CI 0.54, 0.98]). Single component podiatry interventions demonstrated no significant effects on falls rate.Conclusionsmultifaceted podiatry interventions and multifactorial interventions involving referral to podiatry produce significant reductions in falls rate. The effect of multi-component podiatry interventions and of podiatry within multifactorial interventions in care homes is unknown and requires further trial data.Prospero registration numberCRD42017068300.

Project description:IntroductionFalls are a major global public health problem and leading cause of accidental or unintentional injury and hospitalisation. Falls in hospital are associated with longer length of stay, readmissions and poor outcomes. Falls prevention is informed by knowledge of reversible falls risk factors and accurate risk identification. The extent to which hospital falls are prevented by evidence-based practice, patient self-management initiatives, environmental modifications and optimisation of falls prevention systems awaits confirmation. Published reviews have mainly evaluated community settings and residential care facilities. A better understanding of hospital falls and the most effective strategies to prevent them is vital to keeping people safe.ObjectivesTo evaluate the effectiveness of falls prevention interventions on reducing falls in hospitalised adults (acute and subacute wards, rehabilitation, mental health, operating theatre and emergency departments). We also summarise components of effective falls prevention interventions.Methods and analysisThis protocol has been registered. The systematic review will be informed by Cochrane guidelines and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis statement.Inclusion criteriarandomised controlled trials, quasi-randomised trials or controlled clinical trials that evaluate falls prevention interventions for use by hospitalised adults or employees. Electronic databases will be searched using key terms including falls, accidental falls, prevention, hospital, rehabilitation, emergency, mental health, acute and subacute. Pairs of independent reviewers will conduct all review steps. Included studies will be evaluated for risk of bias. Data for variables such as age, participant characteristics, settings and interventions will be extracted and analysed with descriptive statistics and meta-analysis where possible. The results will be presented textually, with flow charts, summary tables, statistical analysis (and meta-analysis where possible) and narrative summaries.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required. The systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and disseminated electronically, in print and at conferences. Updates will guide healthcare translation into practice.Trail registration numberPROSPERO 2017: CRD 42017058887. Available from https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero.

Project description:Background and aimFalls are common among older adults in India. Several primary studies on its risk factors have been conducted in India. However, no systematic review has been conducted on this topic. Thus, the objective of this systematic review was to synthesize the existing evidence on the risk factors for falls among older adults in India.MethodsJBI and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyse guidelines were followed, and two independent reviewers were involved in the process. This review included observational studies conducted among older adults (aged ≥ 60 years) residing in India, reporting any risk factor for falls as exposure and unintentional fall as the outcome. MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo, CINAHL, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses were searched until September 24, 2020. Where possible, data were synthesized using random-effects meta-analysis.ResultsThe literature search yielded 3445 records. Twenty-two studies met the inclusion criteria of this systematic review, and 19 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Out of the 22 included studies in the systematic review, 12 (out of 18) cross-sectional studies, two case-control studies, and two cohort studies met more than 70% criteria in the respective Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklists. Risk factors for falls among older adults in India included sociodemographic factors, environmental factors, lifestyle factors, physical and/or mental health conditions, and medical interventions.ConclusionsThis systematic review and meta-analysis provided a holistic picture of the problem in India by considering a range of risk factors such as sociodemographic, environmental, lifestyle, physical and/or mental health conditions and medical intervention. These findings could be used to develop falls prevention interventions for older adults in India.Systematic review and meta‐analysis registrationThe systematic review and meta-analysis protocol was registered with PROSPERO (registration number-CRD42020204818).

Project description:Background and objectiveThe prevalence of falls among older adults living in the community is ~30% each year. The impacts of falls are not only confined to the individual but also affect families and the community. Injury from a fall also imposes a heavy financial burden on patients and their families. Currently, there are different reports on the risk factors for falls among older adults in the community. A retrospective analysis was used in this study to identify risk factors for falls in community-dwelling older adults. This research aimed to collect published studies to find risk factors for falls in community-dwelling older adults.MethodsWe searched for literature from the founding of PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Web of Science, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), the China Science and Technology Periodicals Database (VIP), and the Wanfang database until September 2022. The studies were selected using inclusion and exclusion criteria. We collected information from relevant studies to compare the impact of potential risk factors such as age, female gender, fear of falling, history of falls, unclear vision, depression, and balance disorder on falls among community-dwelling older adults.ResultsA total of 31 studies were included with 70,868 community seniors. A significant risk factor for falls in the community of older adults was dementia (2.01, 95% CI: 1.41-2.86), age (1.15, 95% CI: 1.09-1.22), female gender (1.52, 95% CI: 1.27-1.81), fear of falling (2.82, 95% CI: 1.68-4.74), history of falls (3.22, 95% CI: 1.98-5.23), vision unclear (1.56, 95% CI: 1.29-1.89), depression (1.23, 95% CI: 1.10-1.37), and balance disorder (3.00, 95% CI: 2.05-4.39).ConclusionThis study provides preliminary evidence that falls among community-dwelling older adults are associated with factors such as age, female gender, fear of falling, history of falls, unclear vision, depression, and balance disorders. The results of this research may help improve clinician awareness, risk stratification, and fall prevention among community-dwelling older adults.Systematic review registrationidentifier INPLASY2022120080.