Improving hospital falls screening and mitigation using a health professional education framework

Preventing hospital falls: feasibility of care workforce redesign to optimise patient falls education

OBJECTIVE

To examine the feasibility of using allied health assistants to deliver patient falls prevention education within 48 h after hospital admission.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Feasibility study with hospital patients randomly allocated to usual care or usual care plus additional patient falls prevention education delivered by supervised allied health assistants using an evidence-based scripted conversation and educational pamphlet.

PARTICIPANTS

(i) allied health assistants and (ii) patients admitted to participating hospital wards over a 20-week period.

OUTCOMES

(i) feasibility of allied health assistant delivery of patient education; (ii) hospital falls per 1,000 bed days; (iii) injurious falls; (iv) number of falls requiring transfer to an acute medical facility.

RESULTS

541 patients participated (median age 81 years); 270 control group and 271 experimental group. Allied health assistants (n = 12) delivered scripted education sessions to 254 patients in the experimental group, 97% within 24 h after admission. There were 32 falls in the control group and 22 in the experimental group. The falls rate was 8.07 falls per 1,000 bed days in the control group and 5.69 falls per 1,000 bed days for the experimental group (incidence rate ratio = 0.66 (95% CI 0.32, 1.36; P = 0.26)). There were 2.02 injurious falls per 1,000 bed days for the control group and 1.03 for the experimental group. Nine falls (7 control, 2 experimental) required transfer to an acute facility. No adverse events were attributable to the experimental group intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

It is feasible and of benefit to supplement usual care with patient education delivered by allied health assistants.

Interprofessional education to implement patient falls education in hospitals: Lessons learned

AIM

The aim of this study was to design, deliver and evaluate an interprofessional education programme for healthcare professionals on how to implement a modified version of the safe recovery programme to prevent falls in hospitalized patients.

DESIGN

Mixed methods design incorporating pre- and post education surveys and individual semi-structured interviews.

METHODS

Thirty-four health professional participants attended a 1-h face-to-face or Zoom® interprofessional education session to learn how to deliver an evidence-based patient falls prevention education strategy, the modified Safe Recovery Programme.

RESULTS

A 1-hour education session was insufficient to build full confidence to deliver the Safe Recovery Programme. There was no statistically significant change in participant views on interprofessional collaboration. Participants recommended prior consultation and preparation before delivery of IPE, with additional opportunities for discussion and feedback during implementation with patients. The findings highlight the importance of interprofessional education for evidence-based interventions in hospitals. Health professionals value education that is timely, interactive, realistic and engaging.

Interventions to reduce falls in hospitals: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Falls remain a common and debilitating problem in hospitals worldwide. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of falls prevention interventions on falls rates and the risk of falling in hospital.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

PARTICIPANTS

Hospitalised adults.

INTERVENTION

Prevention methods included staff and patient education, environmental modifications, assistive devices, policies and systems, rehabilitation, medication management and management of cognitive impairment. We evaluated single and multi-factorial approaches.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Falls rate ratios (rate ratio: RaR) and falls risk, as defined by the odds of being a faller in the intervention compared to control group (odds ratio: OR).

RESULTS

There were 43 studies that satisfied the systematic review criteria and 23 were included in meta-analyses. There was marked heterogeneity in intervention methods and study designs. The only intervention that yielded a significant result in the meta-analysis was education, with a reduction in falls rates (RaR = 0.70 [0.51-0.96], P = 0.03) and the odds of falling (OR = 0.62 [0.47-0.83], P = 0.001). The patient and staff education studies in the meta-analysis were of high quality on the GRADE tool. Individual trials in the systematic review showed evidence for clinician education, some multi-factorial interventions, select rehabilitation therapies, and systems, with low to moderate risk of bias.

CONCLUSION

Patient and staff education can reduce hospital falls. Multi-factorial interventions had a tendency towards producing a positive impact. Chair alarms, bed alarms, wearable sensors and use of scored risk assessment tools were not associated with significant fall reductions.

Trends of Nursing Research on Accidental Falls: A Topic Modeling Analysis

This descriptive study analyzed 1849 international and 212 Korean studies to explore the main topics of nursing research on accidental falls. We extracted only nouns from each abstract, and four topics were identified through topic modeling, which were divided into aspects of fall prevention and its consequences. "Fall prevention program and scale" is popular among studies on the validity of fall risk assessment tools and the development of exercise and education programs. "Nursing strategy for fall prevention" is common in studies on nurse education programs and practice guidelines to improve the quality of patient safety care. "Hospitalization by fall injury" is used in studies about delayed discharge, increased costs, and deaths of subjects with fall risk factors hospitalized at medical institutions due to fall-related injuries. "Long-term care facility falls" is popular in studies about interventions to prevent fall injuries that occur in conjunction with dementia in long-term care facilities. It is necessary to establish a system and policy for fall prevention in Korean medical institutions. This study confirms the trends in domestic and international fall-related research, suggesting the need for studies to address insufficient fall-related policies and systems and translational research to be applied in clinical trials.

Divesting from a Scored Hospital Fall Risk Assessment Tool (FRAT): A Cluster Randomized Non-Inferiority Trial

Background/Objectives

We investigated the impact of ceasing routine falls risk assessment tool (FRAT) completion and instead used clinical reasoning to select fall mitigation strategies.

Design

Two‐group, multi‐site cluster‐randomized active‐control non‐inferiority trial.

Setting

Hospital wards.

Participants

Adult inpatients admitted to participating hospitals (n = 10 hospitals, 123,176 bed days).

Intervention

Hospitals were randomly assigned (1:1) to a usual care control group that continued to use a historical FRAT to assign falls risk scores and accompanying mitigation strategies, or an experimental group whereby clinicians did not assign risk scores and instead used clinical reasoning to select fall mitigation strategies using a decision support list.

Measurements

The primary measure was between‐group difference in mean fall rates (falls/1000 bed days). Falls were identified from incident reports supplemented by hand searches of medical records over three consecutive months at each hospital. The incidence rate ratio (IRR) of monthly falls rates in control versus experimental hospitals was also estimated.

Results

The experimental clinical reasoning approach was non‐inferior to the usual care FRAT that assigned fall risk ratings when compared to a‐priori stakeholder derived and sensitivity non‐inferiority margins. The mean fall rates were 3.84 falls/1000 bed days for the FRAT continuing sites and 3.11 falls/1000 bed days for experimental sites. After adjusting for historical fall rates at each hospital, the IRR (95%CI) was 0.78 (0.64, 0.95), where IRR < 1.00 indicated fewer falls among the experimental group. There were 4 and 3 serious events in the control and experimental groups, respectively.

Conclusion

Replacing a FRAT scoring system with clinical reasoning did not lead to inferior fall outcomes in the short term and may even reduce fall incidence.