Effect of a fall prevention strategy for the older patients: A quasi-experimental study

Systematic review on the frequency and quality of reporting patient and public involvement in patient safety research

BACKGROUND

In recent years, patient and public involvement (PPI) in research has significantly increased; however, the reporting of PPI remains poor. The Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public (GRIPP2) was developed to enhance the quality and consistency of PPI reporting. The objective of this systematic review is to identify the frequency and quality of PPI reporting in patient safety (PS) research using the GRIPP2 checklist.

METHODS

Searches were performed in Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL from 2018 to December, 2023. Studies on PPI in PS research were included. We included empirical qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods, and case studies. Only articles published in peer-reviewed journals in English were included. The quality of PPI reporting was assessed using the short form of the (GRIPP2-SF) checklist.

RESULTS

A total of 8561 studies were retrieved from database searches, updates, and reference checks, of which 82 met the eligibility criteria and were included in this review. Major PS topics were related to medication safety, general PS, and fall prevention. Patient representatives, advocates, patient advisory groups, patients, service users, and health consumers were the most involved. The main involvement across the studies was in commenting on or developing research materials. Only 6.1% (n = 5) of the studies reported PPI as per the GRIPP2 checklist. Regarding the quality of reporting following the GRIPP2-SF criteria, our findings show sub-optimal reporting mainly due to failures in: critically reflecting on PPI in the study; reporting the aim of PPI in the study; and reporting the extent to which PPI influenced the study overall.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review shows a low frequency of PPI reporting in PS research using the GRIPP2 checklist. Furthermore, it reveals a sub-optimal quality in PPI reporting following GRIPP2-SF items. Researchers, funders, publishers, and journals need to promote consistent and transparent PPI reporting following internationally developed reporting guidelines such as the GRIPP2. Evidence-based guidelines for reporting PPI should be encouraged and supported as it helps future researchers to plan and report PPI more effectively.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The review protocol is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023450715).

Evaluation of a concise fall risk stratification among older adults with cataracts in day surgery settings: A historically controlled study

AIM

This study aimed to evaluate the use of a concise fall risk stratification in assessing and predicting falls compared with the Morse Falls Scale among older adults with cataracts in day surgery settings.

METHODS

A historically controlled study conducted from July 2020 to June 2022 was used in a municipal ophthalmic hospital in China. The concise fall risk stratification which directly graded fall risk by multifactorial judgment was used during the intervention period, while the Morse Falls Scale which graded fall risk by scale scores was used during the control period. The fall risk levels, fall assessment time, fall rates, fall-related injuries, predictive validity, and patient satisfaction with day surgery care were extracted. Propensity score matching was performed to balance baselines.

RESULTS

After matching, 4132 patients were included in the final analysis. Compared with the control group, the intervention group had significantly higher assessment results for fall risk level, a significantly shorter (by 48.15%) fall assessment time, and higher patient satisfaction. There were no differences in fall rates and fall-related injuries. Compared with the Morse Falls Scale, the concise fall risk stratification had higher sensitivity and negative predictive validity, and lower specificity and positive predictive validity, while the area under curve did not differ significantly.

CONCLUSION

The use of the concise fall risk stratification reduced fall assessment time, improved patient satisfaction, and is unlikely to impact falls with an overall predictive performance comparable to that of the Morse Falls Scale for older cataract adults in day surgery settings.