Dataset Information

Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the effectiveness of deprescribing in falls prevention in older people

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

One of the known risk factors for fall incidents is the use of specific medications, fall-risk-increasing drugs (FRIDs). However, to date, there is uncertainty related to the effectiveness of deprescribing as a single intervention in falls prevention. Thus, a comprehensive update of the literature focusing on all settings in which older people receive healthcare and all deprescribing interventions is warranted to enhance the current knowledge.

Methods and analysis

This systematic review protocol follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A systematic search was performed in Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO (2 November 2020). We will also search in trial registers. We will include randomised controlled trials, in which any deprescribing intervention is compared with usual care and reports falls as an outcome. Both title and abstract screening and full-text screening will be done by two reviewers. The Cochrane Collaboration revised tool of Risk of Bias will be applied to perform risk of bias assessment. We will categorise the results separately for every setting. If a group of sufficiently comparable studies will be identified, we will perform a meta-analysis applying random effects model. We will investigate heterogeneity using a combination of visual inspection of the forest plot along with consideration of the χ2 test and the I2 statistic results. We have prespecified several subgroup and sensitivity analyses.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethics approval is not applicable for this study since no original data will be collected. The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication and conference presentations. Furthermore, this systematic review will inform the recommendations of working group of polypharmacy and FRIDs of the anticipated World’s Falls Guidelines.

PROSPERO registration number

CRD42020218231.

SUBMITTER: Seppala L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8572380 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

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:BackgroundThere is growing acknowledgement of the need for a phased approach to scaling up health interventions, beginning with an assessment of 'scalability', that is, the capacity of an individual intervention to be scaled up. This study aims to assess the scalability of a multi-component integrated falls prevention service for community-dwelling older people and to examine the applicability of the Intervention Scalability Assessment Tool (ISAT). The ISAT consists of 10 domains for consideration when determining the scalability of an intervention, and each domain comprises a series of questions aimed at examining readiness for scale-up.MethodsMultiple methods were used sequentially as recommended by the ISAT: a review of policy documents, results from a service evaluation and falls-related literature; one-to-one interviews (n = 11) with key stakeholders involved in management and oversight of the service; and a follow-up online questionnaire (n = 10) with stakeholders to rate scalability and provide further feedback on reasons for their scores.ResultsThree of the ISAT domains were rated highly by the participants. Analysis of the qualitative feedback and documents indicated that the issue of falls prevention among older people was of sufficient priority to warrant scale-up of the service and that the service aligned with national health policy priorities. Some participants also noted that benefits of the service could potentially outweigh costs through reduced hospital admissions and serious injuries such as hip fracture. The remaining domains received a moderate score from participants, however, indicating considerable barriers to scale-up. In the qualitative feedback, barriers identified included the perceived need for more healthcare staff to deliver components of the service, for additional infrastructure such as adequate room space, and for an integrated electronic patient management system linking primary and secondary care and to prevent duplication of services.ConclusionsPlans to scale up the service are currently under review given the practical barriers that need to be addressed. The ISAT provides a systematic and structured framework for examining the scalability of this multi-component falls prevention intervention, although the iterative nature of the process and detailed and technical nature of its questions require considerable time and knowledge of the service to complete.

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: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:ObjectivesPrevention of falls and fall-related injuries is a priority due to the substantial health and financial burden of falls on patients and healthcare systems. Deprescribing medications known as 'fall-risk increasing drugs' (FRIDs) is a common strategy to prevent falls. We conducted a systematic review to determine its efficacy for the prevention of falls and fall-related complications.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesMEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL and grey literature from inception to 1 August 2020.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesRandomised controlled trials of FRID withdrawal compared with usual care evaluating the rate of falls, incidence of falls, fall-related injuries, fall-related fractures, fall-related hospitalisations or adverse effects related to the intervention in adults aged ≥65 years.Data extraction and synthesisTwo reviewers independently performed citation screening, data abstraction, risk of bias assessment and certainty of evidence grading. Random-effects models were used for meta-analyses.ResultsFive trials involving 1305 participants met eligibility criteria. Deprescribing FRIDs did not change the rate of falls (rate ratio (RaR) 0.98, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.51), the incidence of falls (risk difference 0.01, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.09; relative risk 1.04, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.26) or rate of fall-related injuries (RaR 0.89, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.39) over a follow-up period of 6-12 months. No trials evaluated the impact of deprescribing FRIDs on fall-related fractures or hospitalisations.ConclusionThere is a paucity of robust high-quality evidence to support or refute that a FRID deprescribing strategy alone is effective at preventing falls or fall-related injury in older adults. Although there may be other reasons to deprescribe FRIDs, our systematic review found that it may result in little to no difference in the rate or risk of falls as a sole falls reduction strategy.Prospero registration numberCRD42016040203.

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.