Dataset Information

Knowledge, skills and attitudes of older people and staff about getting up from the floor following a fall: a qualitative investigation

ABSTRACT: Background Falls are the most common reason for ambulance callouts resulting in non-conveyance. Even in the absence of injury, only half of those who fall can get themselves up off the floor, often remaining there over an hour, increasing risk of complications. There are recognized techniques for older people to learn how to get up after a fall, but these are rarely taught. The aim of this study was to develop an understanding of attitudes of older people, carers and health professionals on getting up following a fall. Methods A qualitative focus group and semi-structured interviews were conducted with 28 participants, including community-dwelling older people with experience of a non-injurious fall, carers, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, paramedics and first responders. Data were transcribed and analysed systematically using the Framework approach. A stakeholder group of falls experts and service users advised during analysis. Results The data highlighted three areas contributing to an individual’s capability to get-up following a fall: the environment (physical and social); physical ability; and degree of self-efficacy (attitude and beliefs about their own ability). These factors fell within the wider context of making a decision about needing help, which included what training and knowledge each person already had to manage their fall response. Staff described how they balance their responsibilities, prioritising the individual’s immediate needs; this leaves limited time to address capability in the aforementioned three areas. Paramedics, routinely responding to falls, only receive training on getting-up techniques from within their peer-group. Therapists are aware of the skillset to breakdown the getting-up process, but, with limited time, select who to teach these techniques to. Conclusion Neither therapists nor ambulance service staff routinely teach strategies on how to get up, meaning that healthcare professionals largely have a reactive role in managing falls. Interventions that address the environment, physical ability and self-efficacy could positively impact on peoples’ capability to get up following a fall. Therefore, a more proactive approach would be to teach people techniques to manage these aspects of future falls and to provide them easily accessible information.

SUBMITTER: Swancutt D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7542342 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundFalls are the most common health problem affecting older people in long-term care facilities (LTCFs), with well-recognised adverse psychological and physical resident outcomes, and high staff burden and financial cost. LTCF staff knowledge and skills can play a vital role in providing and promoting fall prevention care.MethodsA descriptive cross-sectional survey study was conducted across 13 LTCF sites in the Southwest of Ireland; a sampling frame facilitated inclusion of a range of provider types and facility sizes. An existing questionnaire, based on fall prevention guidance, and examining staff knowledge, skills and attitudes, was distributed in physical and online formats.ResultThe response rate was 15% (n = 155), predominantly healthcare assistants, staff nurses and senior nurses. Almost 90% expressed high confidence levels for delivering fall prevention interventions and being aware of how falls affect LTCFs. However, over half underestimated the fall rate in LTCFs, and only 60% had adequate knowledge. Longer experience in working with older people in healthcare services was associated with greater knowledge (p = .001) and confidence in fall prevention interventions (p = .01), while senior nurses had more knowledge than others (p = .01). LTCF staff had lowest knowledge about "identification systems for residents at high risk of falling", "keeping confused residents near nursing stations", "the effect of using antipsychotic medicine on falls", "using a toileting regimen" and "staff responsibility regarding fall prevention efforts". Despite their knowledge gaps, nearly 50% thought they had enough fall prevention training; their main preference for any further fall education training was face-to-face education.ConclusionThe results, with the caveat of a low response rate, show the need for interdisciplinary fall prevention training that is tailored to both the perceived learning needs and actual knowledge gap of LTCF staff and their preferences for learning delivery, as part of an overall approach to reducing fall-related adverse outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundIn the past decade, molecular diagnostic syndromic arrays incorporating a range of bacterial and viral pathogens have been described. It is unclear how paediatric intensive care unit (PICU) staff diagnose lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) and integrate diagnostic array results into antimicrobial decision-making.MethodsAn online survey with eleven questions was distributed throughout paediatric intensive care societies in the UK, continental Europe and Australasia with a total of 755 members. Participants were asked to rate the clinical factors and investigations they used when prescribing for LRTI. Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with staff who participated in a single-centre observational study of a 52-pathogen diagnostic array.ResultsSeventy-two survey responses were received; most responses were from senior doctors. Whilst diagnostic arrays were used less frequently than routine investigations (i.e. microbiological culture), they were of comparable perceived utility when making antimicrobial decisions. Prescribers reported that for arrays to be clinically impactful, they would need to deliver results within 6 h for stable patients and within 1 h for unstable patients to inform their immediate decision to prescribe antimicrobials. From 16 staff interviews, we identified that arrays were helpful for the diagnosis and screening of bacterial LRTI. Staff reported it could be challenging to interpret results in some cases due to the high sensitivity of the test. Therefore, results were considered within the context of the patient and discussed within the multidisciplinary team.ConclusionsDiagnostic arrays were considered of comparable value to microbiological investigations by PICU prescribers. Our findings support the need for further clinical and economic evaluation of diagnostic arrays in a randomised control trial.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov, NCT04233268. Registered on 18 January 2020.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s44253-023-00008-z.

Dataset Information

Knowledge, skills and attitudes of older people and staff about getting up from the floor following a fall: a qualitative investigation

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets