Dataset Information

Falls efficacy instruments for community-dwelling older adults: a COSMIN-based systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Falls efficacy is a widely-studied latent construct in community-dwelling older adults. Various self-reported instruments have been used to measure falls efficacy. In order to be informed of the choice of the best measurement instrument for a specific purpose, empirical evidence of the development and measurement properties of falls efficacy related instruments is needed.

Methods

The Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Intruments (COSMIN) checklist was used to summarise evidence on the development, content validity, and structural validity of instruments measuring falls efficacy in community-dwelling older adults. Databases including MEDLINE, Web of Science, PsychINFO, SCOPUS, CINAHL were searched (May 2019). Records on the development of instruments and studies assessing content validity or structural validity of falls efficacy related scales were included. COSMIN methodology was used to guide the review of eligible studies and in the assessment of their methodological quality. Evidence of content validity: relevance, comprehensiveness and comprehensibility and unidimensionality for structural validity were synthesised. A modified GRADE approach was applied to evidence synthesis.

Results

Thirty-five studies, of which 18 instruments had been identified, were included in the review. High-quality evidence showed that the Modified Falls Efficacy Scale (FES)-13 items (MFES-13) has sufficient relevance, yet insufficient comprehensiveness for measuring falls efficacy. Moderate quality evidence supported that the FES-10 has sufficient relevance, and MFES-14 has sufficient comprehensibility. Activities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale-Simplified (ABC-15) has sufficient relevance in measuring balance confidence supported by moderate-quality evidence. Low to very low-quality evidence underpinned the content validity of other instruments. High-quality evidence supported sufficient unidimensionality for eight instruments (FES-10, MFES-14, ABC-6, ABC-15, ABC-16, Iconographical FES (Icon-FES), FES-International (FES-I) and Perceived Ability to Prevent and Manage Fall Risks (PAPMFR)).

Conclusion

Content validity of instruments to measure falls efficacy is understudied. Structural validity is sufficient for a number of widely-used instruments. Measuring balance confidence is a subset of falls efficacy. Further work is needed to investigate a broader construct for falls efficacy.

SUBMITTER: Soh SL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7792090 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Falls efficacy instruments for community-dwelling older adults: a COSMIN-based systematic review.

Soh Shawn Leng-Hsien SL Lane Judith J Xu Tianma T Gleeson Nigel N Tan Chee Wee CW

BMC geriatrics 20210107 1

<h4>Background</h4>Falls efficacy is a widely-studied latent construct in community-dwelling older adults. Various self-reported instruments have been used to measure falls efficacy. In order to be informed of the choice of the best measurement instrument for a specific purpose, empirical evidence of the development and measurement properties of falls efficacy related instruments is needed.<h4>Methods</h4>The Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Intruments (COSMIN) c ...[more]

PMID: 33413136

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo systematically review and critically appraise prognostic models for falls in community-dwelling older adults.Eligibility criteriaProspective cohort studies with any follow-up period. Studies had to develop or validate multifactorial prognostic models for falls in community-dwelling older adults (60+ years). Models had to be applicable for screening in a general population setting.Information sourceMEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library, PsycINFO and Web of Science for studies published in English, Danish, Norwegian or Swedish until January 2020. Sources also included trial registries, clinical guidelines, reference lists of included papers, along with contacting clinical experts to locate published studies.Data extraction and risk of biasTwo authors performed all review stages independently. Data extraction followed the Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies checklist. Risk of bias assessments on participants, predictors, outcomes and analysis methods followed Prediction study Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool.ResultsAfter screening 11 789 studies, 30 were eligible for inclusion (n=86 369 participants). Median age of participants ranged from 67.5 to 83.0 years. Falls incidences varied from 5.9% to 59%. Included studies reported 69 developed and three validated prediction models. Most frequent falls predictors were prior falls, age, sex, measures of gait, balance and strength, along with vision and disability. The area under the curve was available for 40 (55.6%) models, ranging from 0.49 to 0.87. Validated models' The area under the curve ranged from 0.62 to 0.69. All models had a high risk of bias, mostly due to limitations in statistical methods, outcome assessments and restrictive eligibility criteria.ConclusionsAn abundance of prognostic models on falls risk have been developed, but with a wide range in discriminatory performance. All models exhibited a high risk of bias rendering them unreliable for prediction in clinical practice. Future prognostic prediction models should comply with recent recommendations such as Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis.Prospero registration numberCRD42019124021.

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.

Project description:BackgroundPrevention programs, and specifically exercise, can reduce falls among community-dwelling older adults, but low adherence limits the benefits of effective interventions. Technology may overcome some barriers to improve uptake and engagement in prevention programs, although less is known on adherence for providing them via this delivery mode. We aimed to synthesize evidence for adherence to technology-based falls prevention programs in community-dwelling older adults 60 years and older. We conducted a systematic review following standard guidelines to identify randomized controlled trials for remote delivered (i.e., no or limited in-person sessions) technology-based falls prevention programs for community-dwelling older adults. We searched nine sources using Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms and keywords (2007-present). The initial search was conducted in June 2023 and updated in December 2023. We also conducted a forward and backward citation search of included studies. Two reviewers independently conducted screening and study assessment; one author extracted data and a second author confirmed findings. We conducted a random effects meta-analysis for adherence, operationalized as participants' completion of program components, and aimed to conduct meta-regressions to examine factors related to program adherence and the association between adherence and functional mobility. We included 11 studies with 569 intervention participants (average mean age 74.5 years). Studies used a variety of technology, such as apps, exergames, or virtual synchronous classes. Risk of bias was low for eight studies. Five interventions automatically collected data for monitoring and completion of exercise sessions, two studies collected participants' online attendance, and four studies used self-reported diaries or attendance sheets. Studies included some behavior change techniques or strategies alongside the technology. There was substantial variability in the way adherence data were reported. The mean (range) percent of participants who did not complete planned sessions (i.e., dropped out or lost to follow-up) was 14% (0-32%). The pooled estimate of the proportion of participants who were adherent to a technology-based falls prevention program was 0.82 (95% CI 0.68, 0.93) for studies that reported the mean number of completed exercise sessions. Many studies needed to provide access to the internet, training, and/or resources (e.g., tablets) to support participants to take part in the intervention. We were unable to conduct the meta-regression for adherence and functional mobility due to an insufficient number of studies. There were no serious adverse events for studies reporting this information (n = 8). The use of technology may confer some benefits for program delivery and data collection. But better reporting of adherence data is needed, as well as routine integration and measurement of training and skill development to use technology, and behavior change strategies within interventions. There may be an opportunity to rethink or reimagine how technology can be used to support people's adoption and integration of physical activity into daily life routines.

Project description:BackgroundOne-third of the community-dwelling older persons fall annually. Guidelines recommend the use of multifactorial falls prevention interventions. However, these interventions are difficult to implement into the community. This systematic review aimed to explore strategies used to implement multifactorial falls prevention interventions into the community.MethodsA systematic search in PubMed (including MEDLINE), CINAHL (EBSCO), Embase, Web of Science (core collection), and Cochrane Library was performed and updated on the 25th of August, 2022. Studies reporting on the evaluation of implementation strategies for multifactorial falls prevention interventions in the community setting were included. Two reviewers independently performed the search, screening, data extraction, and synthesis process (PRISMA flow diagram). The quality of the included reports was appraised by means of a sensitivity analysis, assessing the relevance to the research question and the methodological quality (Mixed Method Appraisal Tool). Implementation strategies were reported according to Proctor et al.'s (2013) guideline for specifying and reporting implementation strategies and the Taxonomy of Behavioral Change Methods of Kok et al. (2016).ResultsTwenty-three reports (eighteen studies) met the inclusion criteria, of which fourteen reports scored high and nine moderate on the sensitivity analysis. All studies combined implementation strategies, addressing different determinants. The most frequently used implementation strategies at individual level were "tailoring," "active learning," "personalize risk," "individualization," "consciousness raising," and "participation." At environmental level, the most often described strategies were "technical assistance," "use of lay health workers, peer education," "increasing stakeholder influence," and "forming coalitions." The included studies did not describe the implementation strategies in detail, and a variety of labels for implementation strategies were used. Twelve studies used implementation theories, models, and frameworks; no studies described neither the use of a determinant framework nor how the implementation strategy targeted influencing factors.ConclusionsThis review highlights gaps in the detailed description of implementation strategies and the effective use of implementation frameworks, models, and theories. The review found that studies mainly focused on implementation strategies at the level of the older person and healthcare professional, emphasizing the importance of "tailoring," "consciousness raising," and "participation" in the implementation process. Studies describing implementation strategies at the level of the organization, community, and policy/society show that "technical assistance," "actively involving stakeholders," and "forming coalitions" are important strategies.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42020187450.

Project description:IntroductionFalls among older adults are associated with adverse sequelae including fractures, chronic pain and disability, which can lead to loss of independence and increased risks of nursing home admissions. The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly increased the uptake of telehealth, but the effectiveness of virtual, home-based fall prevention programmes is not clearly known. We aim to synthesise the trials on telerehabilitation and home-based falls prevention programmes to determine their effectiveness in reducing falls and adverse outcomes, as well as to describe the safety risks associated with telerehabilitation.Methods and analysisThis protocol was developed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P). Database searches from inception to August 2022 will be conducted without language restrictions of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Ovid HealthSTAR, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, Physiotherapy EvidenceDatabase (PEDro) and the Cochrane Library. Grey literature including major geriatrics conference proceedings will be reviewed. Using Covidence software, two independent reviewers will in duplicate determine the eligibility of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Eligible RCTs will compare telerehabilitation and home-based fall prevention programmes to usual care among community-dwelling older adults and will report at least one efficacy outcome: falls, fractures, hospitalisations, mortality or quality of life; or at least one safety outcome: pain, myalgias, dyspnoea, syncope or fatigue. Secondary outcomes include functional performance in activities of daily living, balance and endurance. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration tool. DerSimonian-Laird random effects models will be used for the meta-analysis. Heterogeneity will be assessed using the I2 statistic and Cochran's Q statistic. We will assess publication bias using the Egger's test. Prespecified subgroup analyses and univariate meta-regression will be used.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required. The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.Prospero registration numberCRD42022356759.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Falls in community-dwelling older people have been recognised as a significant public health issue in China given the rapidly growing aged population. Although there are several reviews documenting falls prevention programs for community-dwelling older adults, no systematic reviews of the scope and quality of falls prevention interventions in Mainland China exist. Therefore, the aim of this study was to systematically review falls prevention interventions for community-dwelling older people living in Mainland China. METHODS:We systematically reviewed literature from Chinese and English databases. All types of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-experimental studies published from 1st January 1990 to 30th September 2019 were included. Observational studies and studies in care facilities and hospitals were excluded. Narrative synthesis was performed to summarise the key features of all included studies. Quality assessment was conducted using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and ROBINS-I tool for randomised and non-randomised studies respectively. RESULTS:A total of 1020 studies were found, and 101 studies were included in the analysis. Overall, very few high quality studies were identified, and there was insufficient rigor to generate reliable evidence on the effectiveness of interventions or their scalability. Most interventions were multiple component interventions, and most studies focused on outcomes such as self-reported falls incidence or awareness of falls prevention. CONCLUSION:There is an opportunity to undertake an evaluation of a rigorously-designed, large-scale falls prevention program for community-dwelling older people in Mainland China. To help mitigate the rising burden of falls in Mainland China, recommendations for future falls prevention interventions have been made. These include: (1) target disadvantaged populations; (2) incorporate personalised interventions; and (3) investigate the effectiveness of those under-explored interventions, such as psychological, social environment, management of urinary incontinence, fluid or nutrition therapy and surgery. The study results will also potentially provide a useful evidence base for other low-and-middle income countries in a similar situation.

Project description:BackgroundPolypharmacy and use of inappropriate medications have been linked to increased risk of falls, hospitalizations, cognitive impairment, and death. The primary objective of this review was to evaluate the effectiveness, comparative effectiveness, and harms of deprescribing interventions among community-dwelling older adults.MethodsWe searched OVID MEDLINE Embase, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library from 1990 through February 2019 for controlled clinical trials comparing any deprescribing intervention to usual care or another intervention. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, hospitalizations, health-related quality of life, and falls. The secondary outcome was use of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs). Interventions were categorized as comprehensive medication review, educational initiatives, and computerized decision support. Data abstracted by one investigator were verified by another. We used the Cochrane criteria to rate risk of bias for each study and the GRADE system to determine certainty of evidence (COE) for primary outcomes.ResultsThirty-eight low and medium risk of bias clinical trials were included. Comprehensive medication review may have reduced all-cause mortality (OR 0.74, 95% CI: 0.58 to 0.95, I2 = 0, k = 12, low COE) but probably had little to no effect on falls, health-related quality of life, or hospitalizations (low to moderate COE). Nine of thirteen trials reported fewer PIMs in the intervention group. Educational interventions probably had little to no effect on all-cause mortality, hospitalizations, or health-related quality of life (low to moderate COE). The effect on falls was uncertain (very low COE). All 11 education trials that included PIMs reported fewer in the intervention than in the control groups. Two of 4 computerized decision support trials reported fewer PIMs in the intervention arms; none included any primary outcomes.DiscussionIn community-dwelling people aged 65 years and older, medication deprescribing interventions may provide small reductions in mortality and use of potentially inappropriate medications.Registry informationPROSPERO - CRD42019132420.

Dataset Information

Falls efficacy instruments for community-dwelling older adults: a COSMIN-based systematic review.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Falls efficacy instruments for community-dwelling older adults: a COSMIN-based systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets