Dataset Information

Home Hazard Removal to Reduce Falls Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Falls are the leading preventable cause of morbidity, mortality, and premature institutionalization for community-dwelling older adults.

Objective

To test the effectiveness of a behavioral intervention on fall risk among older adults receiving services from an Area Agency on Aging.

Design, setting, and participants

This randomized clinical trial examined a home hazard removal intervention in the community using a race- and sex-stratified randomization design. Older adults receiving services from the Area Agency on Aging in urban St Louis, Missouri, were assigned to a home hazard removal intervention delivered over 2 weeks with a 6-month booster or usual care control. Eligible participants were adults aged 65 years or older who did not have dementia, were at high risk for falling, and resided in the community. Enrollment occurred from January 2015 to September 2016; 12-month follow-up occurred from February 2016 to October 2017. Data were analyzed from February 2019 to July 2021.

Interventions

The intervention was a home hazard removal program delivered by an occupational therapist in the home that included a comprehensive clinical assessment and a tailored hazard removal plan. Usual care control consisted of annual assessments and community referral.

Main outcomes and measures

The primary outcome was the hazard of a fall over 12 months. Prespecified secondary outcomes included the rate of falls over 12 months, daily activity performance, falls self-efficacy, and self-reported quality of life.

Results

A total of 310 participants (mean [SD] age, 75 [7.4] years; 229 [74%] women; 161 Black participants [52%]) were randomized, with 155 participants assigned to the intervention and 155 participants assigned to usual care. Retention was 127 participants (82%) in the intervention group and 126 participants (81%) in the control group. There was no difference for our primary outcome of fall hazard (hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.66-1.27). There was a 38% reduction in the rate of falling in the intervention group compared with the control group (relative risk, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.40-0.95; P = .03). At 12 months, the rate of falls per person-year was 1.5 (95% CI, 1.32-1.75) in the intervention group and 2.3 (95% CI, 2.08-2.60) in the control group. There was no difference in daily activity performance (adjusted difference, -0.20; 95% CI, -0.95 to 0.55; P = .60), falls self-efficacy (adjusted difference, -0.12; 95% CI, -1.25 to 1.01; P = .84), or quality of life (adjusted difference, 0.84; 95% CI, -0.95 to 2.64; P = .35).

Conclusions and relevance

This randomized clinical trial found that a brief home hazard removal program did not reduce the hazard of falls among community-dwelling older adults at high risk for falling. The intervention was effective in achieving a reduced rate of falls, a prespecified secondary outcome. This effectiveness study has the potential for delivery through the national aging services network.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02392013.

SUBMITTER: Stark S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8408671 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceWhether exercise reduces subsequent falls in high-risk older adults who have already experienced a fall is unknown.ObjectiveTo assess the effect of a home-based exercise program as a fall prevention strategy in older adults who were referred to a fall prevention clinic after an index fall.Design, setting, and participantsA 12-month, single-blind, randomized clinical trial conducted from April 22, 2009, to June 5, 2018, among adults aged at least 70 years who had a fall within the past 12 months and were recruited from a fall prevention clinic.InterventionsParticipants were randomized to receive usual care plus a home-based strength and balance retraining exercise program delivered by a physical therapist (intervention group; n = 173) or usual care, consisting of fall prevention care provided by a geriatrician (usual care group; n = 172). Both were provided for 12 months.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was self-reported number of falls over 12 months. Adverse event data were collected in the exercise group only and consisted of falls, injuries, or muscle soreness related to the exercise intervention.ResultsAmong 345 randomized patients (mean age, 81.6 [SD, 6.1] years; 67% women), 296 (86%) completed the trial. During a mean follow-up of 338 (SD, 81) days, a total of 236 falls occurred among 172 participants in the exercise group vs 366 falls among 172 participants in the usual care group. Estimated incidence rates of falls per person-year were 1.4 (95% CI, 0.1-2.0) vs 2.1 (95% CI, 0.1-3.2), respectively. The absolute difference in fall incidence was 0.74 (95% CI, 0.04-1.78; P = .006) falls per person-year and the incident rate ratio was 0.64 (95% CI, 0.46-0.90; P = .009). No adverse events related to the intervention were reported.Conclusions and relevanceAmong older adults receiving care at a fall prevention clinic after a fall, a home-based strength and balance retraining exercise program significantly reduced the rate of subsequent falls compared with usual care provided by a geriatrician. These findings support the use of this home-based exercise program for secondary fall prevention but require replication in other clinical settings.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT01029171; NCT00323596.

Project description:BackgroundFalls among older adults is a common precipitating factor for unintentional injuries and represent a major health problem associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and health care cost in low-and-middle-income countries. The burden of fall in this population is well established in high-income countries and scant attention is given to this precipitating factor in low-and-middle-income countries, including Ethiopia. Therefore, this study aimed to estimate the prevalence and factors associated with fall among community-dwelling older adults in Ethiopia.MethodsA community-based cross-sectional study was conducted among community-dwelling older adults of Gondar. Multi-stage random sampling technique was used across administrative areas. Six hundred and five households were selected proportionally using systematic random sampling technique. Physical measurement and face to face interview method were employed using a structured questionnaire for data collection. Data were analyzed descriptively and through uni- and multivariate logistic regression model.ResultsOne hundred and seventy (n = 170, 28.4%; 95% CI 24.7-32.1) community-dwelling older adults reported having experienced fall in the past 12 months. Sex (OR = 1.91, 95% CI: 1.24-2.95), low educational status (OR = 2.37, 95% CI: 1.19-4.74), uncomfortable home environment (OR = 2.02, 95% CI: 1.34, 3.04), having diagnosed medical condition (OR = 4.659, 95% CI: 1.20-18.02), and use of medication (OR = 5.57, 95% CI: 1.19-26.21) were significantly associated risk factors of self-reported fall in the past 12 months. Most outdoor falls are associated with females and participants aged below 66 years.ConclusionIn conclusion, more than 1/4th of the community-dwelling older adults experienced at least one episode of fall and about 60% of them reported recurrent falls. Identifying risk group and risk factors that could be modified so as to prevent falls in older adults deserves attention. Outdoor falls are usually attributable to modifiable environmental aspects and improvements in outdoor environment needed.

Project description:BackgroundFalls 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.MethodsThe 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.ResultsThirty-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)).ConclusionContent 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.

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:IntroductionFalls are a worldwide health problem among community-dwelling older adults. Emerging evidence suggests that foot problems increase the risk of falling, so the podiatrist may be crucial in detecting foot-related fall risk. However, there is no screening tool available which can be used in podiatry practice. The predictive value of existing tools is limited, and the implementation is poor. The development of risk models for specific clinical populations might increase the prediction accuracy and implementation. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop and internally validate an easily applicable clinical prediction model (CPM) that can be used in podiatry practice to predict falls in community-dwelling older adults with foot (-related) problems.MethodsThis was a prospective study including community-dwelling older adults (≥65 years) visiting podiatry practices. General fall-risk variables, and foot-related and function-related variables were considered as predictors for the occurrence of falls during the 12-month follow-up. Logistic regression analysis was used for model building, and internal validation was done by bootstrap resampling.Results407 participants were analyzed; the event rate was 33.4%. The final model included fall history in the previous year, unsteady while standing and walking, plantarflexor strength of the lesser toes, and gait speed. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.71 (95% CI: 0.66-0.76) in the sample and estimated as 0.65 after shrinkage.ConclusionA CPM based on fall history in the previous year, feeling unsteady while standing and walking, decreased plantarflexor strength of the lesser toes, and reduced gait speed has acceptable accuracy to predict falls in our sample of podiatry community-dwelling older adults and is easily applicable in this setting. The accuracy of the model in clinical practice should be demonstrated through external validation of the model in a next study.