Effectiveness of the Wearable Sensor based Ambient Intelligent Geriatric Management System (AmbIGeM) in Preventing Falls in Older People in Hospitals

Wearable Sensors in Other Medical Domains with Application Potential for Orthopedic Trauma Surgery-A Narrative Review

The use of wearable technology is steadily increasing. In orthopedic trauma surgery, where the musculoskeletal system is directly affected, focus has been directed towards assessing aspects of physical functioning, activity behavior, and mobility/disability. This includes sensors and algorithms to monitor real-world walking speed, daily step counts, ground reaction forces, or range of motion. Several specific reviews have focused on this domain. In other medical fields, wearable sensors and algorithms to monitor digital biometrics have been used with a focus on domain-specific health aspects such as heart rate, sleep, blood oxygen saturation, or fall risk. This review explores the most common clinical and research use cases of wearable sensors in other medical domains and, from it, derives suggestions for the meaningful transfer and application in an orthopedic trauma context.

Findings from three methods to identify falls in hospitals: Results from the Ambient Intelligent Geriatric Management system fall prevention trial

OBJECTIVE

To (a) compare characteristics of patients who fall with those of patients who did not fall; and (b) characterise falls (time, injury severity and location) through three fall reporting methods (incident system reports, medical notes and clinician reports).

METHODS

A substudy design within a stepped-wedge clinical trial was used: 3239 trial participants were recruited from two inpatient Geriatric Evaluation and Management Units and one general medicine ward in two Australian states. To compare the characteristics of patients who had fallen with those who had not, descriptive tests were used. To characterise falls through three reporting methods, bivariate logistic regressions were used.

RESULTS

Patients who had fallen were more likely than patients who had not fallen to be cognitively impaired (51% vs. 29%, p < 0.01), admitted with falls (38% vs. 28%, p = 0.01) and have poor health outcomes such as prolonged length of stay (24 [16-34] vs. 12 [8-19] days [IQR], p < 0.01) and less likely to be discharged directly to the community (62% vs. 47%, p < 0.01). Most falls were captured from medical notes (93%), with clinician (71%) and incident reports (68%) missing 21%-25% of falls. The proportion of injurious falls identified through incident reports was higher than medical records or clinician reports (40% vs. 34% vs. 37%).

CONCLUSIONS

This study reaffirms the need to improve reporting falls in incident systems and at clinical handover to the team leader. Research should continue to use more than one method of identifying falls, but include data from medical records. Many falls cause injury, resulting in poor health outcomes.

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.

Frequency, Characteristics, and Risk Factors for Falls at an Inpatient Cancer Rehabilitation Unit

PURPOSE

Falls in the hospital can lead to adverse events, including injuries. Studies have shown that patients with cancer and those undergoing inpatient rehabilitation (IPR) are at higher risk for falls. Therefore, we measured the frequency, degree of harm, and characteristics of patients who fell in an inpatient cancer rehabilitation unit.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted on inpatient cancer rehabilitation patients admitted from January 2012 to February 2016. Fall frequency, degree of harm, fall circumstances, cancer type, patient's fall risk score on the basis of the MD Anderson Cancer Center Adult Inpatient Fall Risk Assessment Tool (MAIFRAT), length of stay, and risk factors were evaluated for patients.

RESULTS

There were 72 out of 1,571 unique individual falls (4.6%), with a falls incidence of 3.76 falls per 1,000 patient-days. Most fallers (86%) suffered no harm. Risk factors for falls included presence of patient-controlled analgesia pump (P = .03), pump such as insulin or wound vacuum-assisted closure (P < .01), nasogastric, gastric, or chest tube (P = .05), and higher MAIFRAT score (P < .01). The fallers were younger (62 v 66; P = .04), had a longer IPR stay (13 v 9; P = .03), and had a lower Charlson comorbidity index (6 v 8; P < .01).

CONCLUSION

The frequency and degree of harm for falls in the IPR unit were less than previous studies, which suggests that mobilization for these patients with cancer is safe. The presence of certain medical devices may contribute to fall risk, and more research is needed to better prevent falls in this higher-risk subgroup.

Cost-Effectiveness and Value of Information Analysis of an Ambient Intelligent Geriatric Management (AmbIGeM) System Compared to Usual Care to Prevent Falls in Older People in Hospitals

BACKGROUND

The Ambient Intelligent Geriatric Management (AmbIGeM) system combines wearable sensors with artificial intelligence to trigger alerts to hospital staff before a fall. A clinical trial found no effect across a heterogenous population, but reported a reduction in the injurious falls rate in a post hoc analysis of patients on Geriatric Evaluation Management Unit (GEMU) wards. Cost-effectiveness and Value of Information (VoI) analyses of the AmbIGeM system in GEMU wards was undertaken.

METHODS

An Australian health-care system perspective and 5-year time horizon were used for the cost-effectiveness analysis. Implementation costs, inpatient costs and falls data were collected. Injurious falls were defined as causing bruising, laceration, fracture, loss of consciousness, or if the patient reported persistent pain. To compare costs and outcomes, generalised linear regression models were used to adjust for baseline differences between the intervention and usual care groups. Bootstrapping was used to represent uncertainty. For the VoI analysis, 10,000 different sample sizes with randomly sampled values ranging from 1 to 50,000 were tested to estimate the optimal sample size of a new trial that maximised the Expected Net Benefits of Sampling.

RESULTS

An adjusted 0.036 fewer injurious falls (adjusted rate ratio of 0.56) and AUD$4554 lower costs were seen in the intervention group. However, uncertainty that the intervention is cost effective for the prevention of an injurious fall was present at all monetary values of this effectiveness outcome. A new trial with a sample of 4376 patients was estimated to maximise the Expected Net Benefit of Sampling, generating a net benefit of AUD$186,632 at a benefit-to-cost ratio of 1.1.

CONCLUSIONS

The benefits to cost ratio suggests that a new trial of the AmbIGeM system in GEMU wards may not be high-value compared to other potential trials, and that the system should be implemented. However, a broader analysis of options for preventing falls in GEMU is required to fully inform decision making.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry (ACTRN 12617000981325).

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.

Disinvestment in the presence of uncertainty: Description of a novel, multi-group, disinvestment trial design and protocol for an application to reduce or cease use of mobilisation alarms for preventing falls in hospitals

Disinvestment is the removal or reduction of previously provided practices or services, and has typically been undertaken where a practice or service has been clearly shown to be ineffective, inefficient and/or harmful. However, practices and services that have uncertain evidence of effectiveness, efficiency and safety can also be considered as candidates for disinvestment. Disinvestment from these practices and services is risky as they may yet prove to be beneficial if further evidence becomes available. A novel research approach has previously been described for this situation, allowing disinvestment to take place while simultaneously generating evidence previously missing from consideration. In this paper, we describe how this approach can be expanded to situations where three or more conditions are of relevance, and describe the protocol for a trial examining the reduction and elimination of use of mobilisation alarms on hospital wards to prevent patient falls. Our approach utilises a 3-group, concurrent, non-inferiority, stepped wedge, randomised design with an embedded parallel, cluster randomised design. Eighteen hospital wards with high rates of alarm use (≥3%) will be paired within their health service and randomly allocated to a calendar month when they will transition to a “Reduced” (<3%) or “Eliminated” (0%) mobilisation alarm condition. Dynamic randomisation will be used to determine which ward in each pair will be allocated to either the reduced or eliminated condition to promote equivalence between wards for the embedded parallel, cluster randomised component of the design. A project governance committee will set non-inferiority margins. The primary outcome will be rates of falls. Secondary clinical, process, safety, and economic outcomes will be collected and a concurrent economic evaluation undertaken.