These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of a fall risk assessment tool with nurses' judgement alone: a cluster-randomised controlled trial.
    Author: Meyer G, Köpke S, Haastert B, Mühlhauser I.
    Journal: Age Ageing; 2009 Jul; 38(4):417-23. PubMed ID: 19435759.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: the impact of fall risk assessment tools on clinical endpoints is unknown. OBJECTIVE: we compared a standardised fall risk assessment tool alongside nurses' clinical judgement with nurses' judgement alone. DESIGN: a 12-month cluster-randomised controlled trial. SETTING: nursing homes in Hamburg (29 per study group). SUBJECTS: 1,125 residents (n = 574 intervention group, IG; n = 551 control group, CG). INTERVENTIONS: all homes received structured information on fall prevention before randomisation. The IG monthly administered the Downton Index, and the CG did not use a tool. Measurements were number of participants with at least one fall, falls, fall-related injuries and medical attention, fall preventive measures, physical restraints. RESULTS: the mean follow-up was 10.8 +/- 2.9 months in both groups: 105 (IG) and 114 (CG) residents died or moved away. There was no difference between the groups concerning the number of residents with at least one fall (IG: 52%, CG: 53%, mean difference -0.7, 95% confidence interval -10.3 to 8.9, P = 0.88) and the number of falls (n = 1,016 and n = 1,014). All other outcomes were also comparable between the IG and CG. CONCLUSIONS: application of a fall risk assessment tool in nursing homes does not result in the better clinical outcome than reliance on nurses' clinical judgement alone.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]