Dataset Information

Fall Prevention Practices and Implementation Strategies: Examining Consistency Across Hospital Units.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Our study examines how consistently fall prevention practices and implementation strategies are used by U.S. hospitals.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional, descriptive study of 60 general adult hospital units.We administered a survey measuring 5 domains of fall prevention practices: visibility and identification, bed modification, patient monitoring, patient safety, and education. We measured 4 domains of implementation strategies including quality management (e.g., providing data and support for quality improvement), planning (e.g., designating leadership), education (e.g., providing consultation and training), and restructuring (e.g., revising staff roles and modifying equipment).

Results

Of 60 units, 43% were medical units and 57% were medical-surgical units. The hospital units varied in fall prevention practices, with practices such as keeping a patient's bed in a locked position (73% strongly agree) being used more consistently than other practices, such as scheduled toileting (15% strongly agree). Our study observed variation in fall prevention implementation strategies. For example, publicly posting fall rates (60% strongly agree) was more consistently used than having a multidisciplinary huddle after a fall event (12% strongly agree).

Conclusions

There is substantial variation in the implementation of fall prevention practices and implementation strategies across inpatient units. Our study found that resource-intensive practices (e.g., scheduled toileting) are less consistently used than less resource-intensive practices and that interdisciplinary approaches to fall prevention are limited. Future studies should examine how units tailor fall prevention practices based on patient risk factors and how units decide, based on their available resources, which implementation strategies should be used.

SUBMITTER: Turner K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7854936 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo systematically document the implementation, components, comparators, adherence, and effectiveness of published fall prevention approaches in U.S. acute care hospitals.DesignSystematic review. Studies were identified through existing reviews, searching five electronic databases, screening reference lists, and contacting topic experts for studies published through August 2011.SettingU.S. acute care hospitals.ParticipantsStudies reporting in-hospital falls for intervention groups and concurrent (e.g., controlled trials) or historic comparators (e.g., before-after studies).InterventionFall prevention interventions.MeasurementsIncidence rate ratios (IRR, ratio of fall rate postintervention or treatment group to the fall rate preintervention or control group) and ratings of study details.ResultsFifty-nine studies met inclusion criteria. Implementation strategies were sparsely documented (17% not at all) and included staff education, establishing committees, seeking leadership support, and occasionally continuous quality improvement techniques. Most interventions (81%) included multiple components (e.g., risk assessments (often not validated), visual risk alerts, patient education, care rounds, bed-exit alarms, and postfall evaluations). Fifty-four percent did not report on fall prevention measures applied in the comparison group, and 39% neither reported fidelity data nor described adherence strategies such as regular audits and feedback to ensure completion of care processes. Only 45% of concurrent and 15% of historic control studies reported sufficient data to compare fall rates. The pooled postintervention incidence rate ratio (IRR) was 0.77 (95% confidence interval = 0.52-1.12, P = .17; eight studies; I(2) : 94%). Meta-regressions showed no systematic association between implementation intensity, intervention complexity, comparator information, or adherence levels and IRR.ConclusionPromising approaches exist, but better reporting of outcomes, implementation, adherence, intervention components, and comparison group information is necessary to establish evidence on how hospitals can successfully prevent falls.

Project description:BackgroundTo guide fall prevention efforts, United States organisations, such as the Joint Commission and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, have recommended organisational-level implementation strategies: leadership support, interdisciplinary falls committees, electronic health record tools, and staff, family and patient education. It is unclear whether hospitals adhere to such strategies or how these strategies are operationalised.ObjectiveTo identify and describe the prevalence of specific hospital fall prevention implementation strategies.MethodsIn 2017, we surveyed 80 US hospitals participating in the National Database of Nursing Quality Indicators who volunteered for the study. We conducted descriptive statistics by calculating percentages for categorical variables and the median and IQR for count variables.ResultsA total of 60/80 (75%) of hospitals completed the survey. The majority of hospitals were not-for-profit (98%) and urban (90%); more than half were Magnet (53%), small (53%) and teaching (52%). Hospitals were more likely to use leadership strategies, such as updating fall policies in the past 3 years (98%) but less likely to reward staff (40%). Hospitals commonly used interdisciplinary falls committees (83%) but membership rarely included physicians. Hospitals lacked access to electronic health record tools, such as high-risk medication warnings (27%). Education strategies were commonly used; 100% of hospitals provided fall education at staff orientation, but only 22% educated all employees (not just nursing staff).ConclusionsOur study is the first to our knowledge to examine which expert-recommended implementation strategies are being used and how they are being operationalised in US hospitals. Future studies are needed to document fall prevention implementation strategies in detail and to test which implementation strategies are most effective at reducing falls. Additionally, research is needed to evaluate the quality of implementation (eg, fidelity) of fall prevention interventions.

Project description:IntroductionFalls are common among older people in long-term care facilities (LCFs). Falls lead to significant morbidity, mortality and reduced quality of life among residents. Fall prevention interventions have been shown to reduce falls in LCFs. However, this may not always translate to effectiveness in real-world situations. We will conduct a systematic review (SR) to identify the implementation strategies used in fall prevention interventions in LCF, describing the effectiveness of strategies in terms of key implementation outcomes and fall reduction.Methods and analysisThe search will include scientific papers in electronic databases, including PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus and Web of Science, and published theses. The SR will consider all original research that empirically evaluated or tested implementation strategies to support fall prevention interventions in LCF, published in English or Arabic between 1 January 2001 and 31 December 2021, where data are presented on the implementation strategy (eg, audit and feedback, champions) and/or implementation outcome (eg, fidelity). Clinical trials, quasi-experimental studies and quality improvement studies will be eligible for inclusion. Two researchers will complete abstract screening, data abstraction and quality assessments independently. The screening process will be presented using a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flow diagram. Data will be extracted into a standardised table, including the country, year, authors, type of study, primary clinical outcome (falls rate and/or risk reduction as available), implementation strategy and implementation outcomes. Implementation strategies will be defined and categorised using the Expert Recommendation for Implementing Change Taxonomy. Implementation outcomes will be defined and categorised using the Implementation Outcomes Taxonomy, and clinical outcomes of the intervention effectiveness for falls preventions will be reported as formulated in each study, with a final narrative synthesis of data.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required for this study, and the results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed journals and presented at international conferences.Prospero registration numberCRD42021239604.

Project description:Infection prevention and control (IPC) program is obligatory for delivering quality services in any healthcare setup. Lack of administrative support and resource-constraints (under-staffing, inadequate funds) were primary barriers to successful implementation of IPC practices in majority of the hospitals in the developing countries. The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) brought a unique opportunity to improve the IPC program in these hospitals. A PDSA (Plan-Do-Study- Act) model was adopted for this study in a tertiary care hospital which was converted into a dedicated COVID-19 treatment facility in Varanasi, India. The initial focus was to identify the deficiencies in existing IPC practices and perceive the opportunities for improvement. Repeated IPC training (induction and reinforce) was conducted for the healthcare personnel (HCP) and practices were monitored by direct observation and closed-circuit television. Cleaning audits were performed by visual inspection, review of the checklists and qualitative assessment of the viewpoints of the HCP was carried out by the feedbacks received at the end of the training sessions. A total of 2552 HCP and 548 medical students were trained in IPC through multiple offline/onsite sessions over a period of 15 months during the ongoing pandemic. Although the overall compliance to surface disinfection and cleaning increased from 50% to >80% with repeated training, compliance decreased whenever newly recruited HCP were posted. Fear psychosis in the pandemic was the greatest facilitator for adopting the IPC practices. Continuous wearing of personal protective equipment for long duration, dissatisfaction with the duty rosters as well as continuous posting in high-risk areas were the major obstacles to the implementation of IPC norms. Recognising the role of an infection control team, repeated training, monitoring and improvisation of the existing resources are keys for successful implementation of IPC practices in hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic.