Assessing the Effectiveness of Engaging Patients and Their Families in the Three-Step Fall Prevention Process Across Modalities of an Evidence-Based Fall Prevention Toolkit: An Implementation Science Study

Fall Tailoring Interventions for Patient Safety Brazil Program: an evaluability study in a teaching hospital

OBJECTIVES

to present the theoretical model, logic model, and the analysis and judgment matrix of the Fall TIPS Brazil Program.

METHODS

a qualitative, participatory research approach, in the form of an evaluability study, encompassing the phases (1) problem analysis; (2) program design, development, and adaptation to the Brazilian context; (3) program dissemination. Data were collected through document analysis and workshops.

RESULTS

through document analysis, workshops with stakeholders from the participating institution, and validation with key informants, it was possible to identify the program's objectives, expected outcomes, and the target audience. This allowed the construction of theoretical and logic models and, through evaluative questions, the identification of indicators for the evaluation of the Fall TIPS Brazil Program.

FINAL CONSIDERATIONS

this study has provided insights into the Fall TIPS program, the topic of hospital fall prevention, and the proposed models and indicators can be employed in the implementation and future evaluative processes of the program.

Practices of falls risk assessment and prevention in acute hospital settings: a realist investigation

Background

Falls are the most common safety incident reported by acute hospitals. The National Institute of Health and Care Excellence recommends multifactorial falls risk assessment and tailored interventions, but implementation is variable.

Aim

To determine how and in what contexts multifactorial falls risk assessment and tailored interventions are used in acute National Health Service hospitals in England.

Design

Realist review and multisite case study. (1) Systematic searches to identify stakeholders' theories, tested using empirical data from primary studies. Review of falls prevention policies of acute Trusts. (2) Theory testing and refinement through observation, staff interviews (n = 50), patient and carer interviews (n = 31) and record review (n = 60).

Setting

Three Trusts, one orthopaedic and one older person ward in each.

Results

Seventy-eight studies were used for theory construction and 50 for theory testing. Four theories were explored. (1) Leadership: wards had falls link practitioners but authority to allocate resources for falls prevention resided with senior nurses. (2) Shared responsibility: a key falls prevention strategy was patient supervision. This fell to nursing staff, constraining the extent to which responsibility for falls prevention could be shared. (3) Facilitation: assessments were consistently documented but workload pressures could reduce this to a tick-box exercise. Assessment items varied. While individual patient risk factors were identified, patients were categorised as high or low risk to determine who should receive supervision. (4) Patient participation: nursing staff lacked time to explain to patients their falls risks or how to prevent themselves from falling, although other staff could do so. Sensitive communication could prevent patients taking actions that increase their risk of falling.

Limitations

Within the realist review, we completed synthesis for only two theories. We could not access patient records before observations, preventing assessment of whether care plans were enacted.

Conclusions

(1) Leadership: There should be a clear distinction between senior nurses' roles and falls link practitioners in relation to falls prevention; (2) shared responsibility: Trusts should consider how processes and systems, including the electronic health record, can be revised to better support a multidisciplinary approach, and alternatives to patient supervision should be considered; (3) facilitation: Trusts should consider how to reduce documentation burden and avoid tick-box responses, and ensure items included in the falls risk assessment tools align with guidance. Falls risk assessment tools and falls care plans should be presented as tools to support practice, rather than something to be audited; (4) patient participation: Trusts should consider how they can ensure patients receive individualised information about risks and preventing falls and provide staff with guidance on brief but sensitive ways to talk with patients to reduce the likelihood of actions that increase their risk of falling.

Future work

(1) Development and evaluation of interventions to support multidisciplinary teams to undertake, and involve patients in, multifactorial falls risk assessment and selection and delivery of tailored interventions; (2) mixed method and economic evaluations of patient supervision; (3) evaluation of engagement support workers, volunteers and/or carers to support falls prevention. Research should include those with cognitive impairment and patients who do not speak English.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42020184458.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR129488) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 12, No. 5. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Determining fall risk change throughout pregnancy: the accuracy of postpartum survey and relationship to fall efficacy

All epidemiological studies on pregnancy fall risk to date have relied on postpartum recall. This study investigated the accuracy of postpartum recall of falls that were reported during pregnancy, including assessment of fall efficacy as a possible reason for recall inaccuracy. Twenty participants reported fall experiences weekly during pregnancy, but one participant was excluded as an outlier. A fall efficacy questionnaire was completed every six weeks during pregnancy. A postpartum survey to mimic previous studies (Dunning, Lemasters, and Bhattacharya 2010; Dunning et al. 2003) was delivered to determine recall accuracy. Postpartum recall of fall events each gestational month matches the previous study (Dunning, Lemasters, and Bhattacharya 2010). However, recall of falls is 16% underestimated and recall of all fall events is 30% overestimated in postpartum survey. There is a slight relationship between fall efficacy and true falls, but not between fall efficacy and fall recall. Our study suggests fall risk needs to be intermittently surveyed throughout pregnancy rather than assessed via postpartum survey.Practitioner summary: This study investigated the accuracy of postpartum survey of fall risk during pregnancy and the possibility of fall efficacy as a covariate. We used three corresponding surveys. We found inaccuracies in postpartum survey, not explain by fall efficacy.

Exploring variation in implementation of multifactorial falls risk assessment and tailored interventions: a realist review

BACKGROUND

Falls are the most common safety incident reported by acute hospitals. In England national guidance recommends delivery of a multifactorial falls risk assessment (MFRA) and interventions tailored to address individual falls risk factors. However, there is variation in how these practices are implemented. This study aimed to explore the variation by examining what supports or constrains delivery of MFRAs and tailored interventions in acute hospitals.

METHODS

A realist review of literature was conducted with searches completed in three stages: (1) to construct hypotheses in the form of Context, Mechanism, Outcome configurations (CMOc) about how MFRAs and interventions are delivered, (2) to scope the breadth and depth of evidence available in Embase to test the CMOcs, and (3) following prioritisation of CMOcs, to refine search strategies for use in multiple databases. Citations were managed in EndNote; titles, abstracts, and full texts were screened, with 10% independently screened by two reviewers.

RESULTS

Two CMOcs were prioritised for testing labelled: Facilitation via MFRA tools, and Patient Participation in interventions. Analysis indicated that MFRA tools can prompt action, but the number and type of falls risk factors included in tools differ across organisations leading to variation in practice. Furthermore, the extent to which tools work as prompts is influenced by complex ward conditions such as changes in patient condition, bed swaps, and availability of falls prevention interventions. Patient participation in falls prevention interventions is more likely where patient directed messaging takes individual circumstances into account, e.g., not wanting to disturb nurses by using the call bell. However, interactions that elicit individual circumstances can be resource intensive and patients with cognitive impairment may not be able to participate despite appropriately directed messaging.

CONCLUSIONS

Organisations should consider how tools can be developed in ways that better support consistent and comprehensive identification of patients' individual falls risk factors and the complex ward conditions that can disrupt how tools work as facilitators. Ward staff should be supported to deliver patient directed messaging that is informed by their individual circumstances to encourage participation in falls prevention interventions, where appropriate.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO: CRD42020184458.

Cost of Inpatient Falls and Cost-Benefit Analysis of Implementation of an Evidence-Based Fall Prevention Program

Importance

There is insufficient research on the costs of patient falls in health care systems, a leading source of nonreimbursable adverse events.

Objective

To report the costs of inpatient falls and the cost savings associated with implementation of an evidence-based fall prevention program.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this economic evaluation, a matched case-control study used the findings from an interrupted time series analysis that assessed changes in fall rates following implementation of an evidence-based fall prevention program to understand the cost of inpatient falls. An economic analysis was then performed to assess the cost benefits associated with program implementation across 2 US health care systems from June 1, 2013, to August 31, 2019, in New York, New York, and Boston, Massachusetts. All adults hospitalized in participating units were included in the analysis. Data analysis was performed from October 2021 to November 2022.

Interventions

Evidence-based fall prevention program implemented in 33 medical and surgical units in 8 hospitals.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Primary outcome was cost of inpatient falls. Secondary outcome was the costs and cost savings associated with the evidence-based fall prevention program.

Results

A total of 10 176 patients who had a fall event (injurious or noninjurious) with 29 161 matched controls (no fall event) were included in the case-control study and the economic analysis (51.9% were 65-74 years of age, 67.1% were White, and 53.6% were male). Before the intervention, there were 2503 falls and 900 injuries; after the intervention, there were 2078 falls and 758 injuries. Based on a 19% reduction in falls and 20% reduction in injurious falls from the beginning to the end of the postintervention period, the economic analysis demonstrated that noninjurious and injurious falls were associated with cost increases of $35 365 and $36 776, respectively. The implementation of the evidence-based fall prevention program was associated with $14 600 in net avoided costs per 1000 patient-days.

Conclusions and Relevance

This economic evaluation found that fall-related adverse events represented a clinical and financial burden to health care systems and that the current Medicare policy limits reimbursement. In this study, costs of falls only differed marginally by injury level. Policies that incentivize organizations to implement evidence-based strategies that reduce the incidence of all falls may be effective in reducing both harm and costs.

Reframing Patient Experience Approaches and Methods to Achieve Patient-Centeredness in Healthcare: Scoping Review

(1) There has been growing attention among healthcare researchers on new and innovative methodologies for improving patient experience. This study reviewed the approaches and methods used in current patient experience research by applying the perspective of design thinking to discuss practical methodologies for a patient-centered approach and creative problem-solving. (2) A scoping review was performed to identify research trends in healthcare. A four-stage design thinking process (“Discover”, “Define”, “Develop”, and “Deliver”) and five themes (“User focus”, “Problem-framing”, “Visualization”, “Experimentation”, and “Diversity”), characterizing the concept, were used for the analysis framework. (3) After reviewing 67 studies, the current studies show that the iterative process of divergent and convergent thinking is lacking, which is a core concept of design thinking, and it is necessary to employ an integrative methodology to actively apply collaborative, multidisciplinary, and creative attributes for a specific and tangible solution. (4) For creative problem-solving to improve patient experience, we should explore the possibilities of various solutions by an iterative process of divergent and convergent thinking. A concrete and visualized solution should be sought through active user interactions from various fields. For this, a specific methodology that allows users to collaborate by applying the integrative viewpoint of design thinking should be introduced.

Impact of family visit restrictions due to COVID-19 policy on patient outcomes: A cohort study

Aim

To investigate the impact of family visit restrictions during the COVID‐19 pandemic on deliriums, falls, pneumonia, pressure ulcers and readmissions among surgical inpatients with gastrointestinal (oncologic) diseases.

Design

Cohort study.

Methods

This study was conducted among adult inpatients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery in two academic hospitals. During the COVID‐19 outbreak in 2020, over a 10‐week period, one cohort was subjected to family visit restrictions. Per patient, one person per day was allowed to visit for a maximum of 30 min. This cohort was compared with another cohort in which patients were not subjected to such restrictions during a 10‐week period in 2019. Logistic regression analyses were used to investigate the impact of the restrictions on deliriums, falls, pneumonia, pressure ulcers and readmissions.

Results

In total, 287 patients were included in the 2020 cohort and 243 in the 2019 cohort. No differences were observed in the cohorts with respect to baseline characteristics. Logistic regression analyses showed no significant differences in deliriums, falls, pneumonia, pressure ulcers and readmissions between the cohorts.

Conclusion

We cautiously conclude that the family visit restrictions during the COVID‐19 pandemic did not contribute to deliriums, falls, pneumonia, pressure ulcers or readmissions in surgical patients with gastrointestinal (oncologic) diseases.

Impact

COVID‐19 influenced family‐centred care due to family visit restrictions. Nurses need to continue monitoring outcomes known to be sensitive to family‐centred care to gain insight into the effects of visit restrictions and share the results in order to include nurses' perspectives in COVID‐19‐decision‐making. Re‐implementing of family visit restrictions should be carefully considered in policy‐making.

Development and Validation of a Fall Prevention Efficiency Scale

OBJECTIVES

Fall TIPS (Tailoring Interventions for Patient Safety) is an evidence-based fall prevention program that led to a 25% reduction in falls in hospitalized adults. Because it would be helpful to assess nurses' perceptions of burdens imposed on them by using Fall TIPS or other fall prevention program, we conducted a study to learn benefits and burdens.

METHODS

A 3-phase mixed-method study was conducted at 3 hospitals in Massachusetts and 3 in New York: (1) initial qualitative, elicited and categorized nurses' views of time spent implementing Fall TIPS; (2) second qualitative, used nurses' quotes to develop items, research team inputs for refinement and organization, and clinical nurses' evaluation and suggestions to develop the prototype scale; and (3) quantitative, evaluated psychometric properties.

RESULTS

Four "time" themes emerged: (1) efficiency, (2) inefficiency, (3) balances out, and (4) valued. A 20-item prototype Fall Prevention Efficiency Scale was developed, administered to 383 clinical nurses, and reduced to 13 items. Individual items demonstrated robust stability with Pearson correlations of 0.349 to 0.550 and paired t tests of 0.155 to 1.636. Four factors explained 74.3% variance and provided empirical support for the scale's conceptual basis. The scale achieved excellent internal consistency values (0.82-0.92) when examined with the test, validation, and paired (both test and retest) samples.

CONCLUSIONS

This new scale assess nurses' perceptions of how a fall prevention program affects their efficiency, which impacts the likelihood of use. Learning nurses' beliefs about time wasted when implementing new programs allows hospitals to correct problems that squander time.

A Multicenter Cohort Study of Falls Among Patients Admitted to the ICU

OBJECTIVES

To determine the incidence of falls, risk factors, and adverse outcomes, among patients admitted to the ICU.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Seventeen ICUs in Alberta, Canada.

PATIENTS

Seventy-three thousand four hundred ninety-five consecutive adult patient admissions between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2019.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

A mixed-effects negative binomial regression model was used to examine risk factors associated with falls. Linear and logistic regression models were used to evaluate adverse outcomes. Six hundred forty patients experienced 710 falls over 398,223 patient days (incidence rate of 1.78 falls per 1,000 patient days [95% CI, 1.65-1.91]). The daily incidence of falls increased during the ICU stay (e.g., day 1 vs day 7; 0.51 vs 2.43 falls per 1,000 patient days) and varied significantly between ICUs (range, 0.37-4.64 falls per 1,000 patient days). Male sex (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.37; 95% CI, 1.15-1.63), previous invasive mechanical ventilation (IRR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.40-2.38), previous sedative and analgesic medication infusions (IRR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.15-2.24), delirium (IRR, 3.85; 95% CI, 3.23-4.58), and patient mobilization (IRR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.21-1.30) were risk factors for falling. Falls were associated with longer ICU (ratio of means [RM], 3.10; 95% CI, 2.86-3.36) and hospital (RM, 2.21; 95% CI, 2.01-2.42) stays, but lower odds of death in the ICU (odds ratio [OR], 0.09; 95% CI, 0.05-0.17) and hospital (OR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.14-0.30).

CONCLUSIONS

We observed that among ICU patients, falls occur frequently, vary substantially between ICUs, and are associated with modifiable risk factors, longer ICU and hospital stays, and lower risk of death. Our study suggests that fall prevention strategies should be considered for critically ill patients admitted to ICU.

Pilot testing of nurse led multimodal intervention for falls prevention

Patient fall-risk awareness, self-efficacy, and engagement in fall-prevention activities are important aspects of fall-prevention. The current pilot study examined the effect of a nurse-led multimodal intervention on hospitalized adults' levels of fall risk awareness, self-efficacy, and engagement in fall prevention. Sixty hospitalized older adults in an acute care setting in Florida participated in the study. There were significant differences [pre-test (M = 19.02, SD=1.152) and post-test (M = 21.71, SD=0.527); t (17.355) = 58, p≤.001] on level of fall risk awareness in fall prevention. There were no significant findings for fall self-efficacy and engagement. Study findings suggested that the higher the fall self-efficacy, the higher the engagement. Future research is needed to examine self-efficacy and engagement for fall prevention in larger diverse cohorts of hospitalized older adults.

Do patient engagement interventions work for all patients? A systematic review and realist synthesis of interventions to enhance patient safety

BACKGROUND

Patients are increasingly being asked for feedback about their healthcare and treatment, including safety, despite little evidence to support this trend. This review identifies the strategies used to engage patients in safety during direct care, explores who is engaged and determines the mechanisms that impact effectiveness.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed of seven databases (CINAHL, Cochrane, Cochrane-Central, Embase, ISI Web of Science, Medline, PsycINFO) that included research published between 2010 and 2020 focused on patient engagement interventions to increase safety during direct care and reported using PRISMA. All research designs were eligible; two reviewers applied criteria independently to determine eligibility and quality. A narrative review and realist synthesis were conducted.

RESULTS

Twenty-six papers reporting on twenty-seven patient engagement strategies were included and classified as consultation (9), involvement (7) and partnership (11). The definitions of 'patient engagement' varied, and we found limited details about participant characteristics or interactions between people utilizing strategies. Collaborative strategy development, a user-friendly design, proactive messaging and agency sponsorship were identified as mechanisms to improve engagement about safety at the point of direct care.

CONCLUSIONS

Agency sponsorship of collaboration between staff and patients is essential in the development and implementation of strategies to keep patients safe during direct care. Insufficient details about participant characteristics and patient-provider interactions limit recommendations for practice change. More needs to be learned about how patients are engaged in discussions about safety, particularly minority groups unable to engage with standard information.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Review progress was reported to the CanEngage team, including the consumer steering group, to inform project priorities (PROSPERO CRD42020196453).

Use of a perceived efficacy tool to evaluate the FallTIPS program

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

To assess nurses' opinions of the efficacy of using the FallTIPS (Tailoring Interventions for Patient Safety) fall prevention program.

DESIGN

Survey research.

SETTING

Seven adult acute-care hospitals in 2 hospital centers located in Boston and NYC.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 298 medical-surgical nurses on 14 randomly selected units.

INTERVENTION

Three-step FallTIPS fall prevention program that had been in use as a clinical program for a minimum of 2 years in each hospital.

MEASUREMENTS

Fall Prevention Efficiency Scale (FPES), range 13-52; four-factorilly derived subscales: valued, efficiency, balances out and inefficiency; and 13 psychometrically validated individual items.

RESULTS

Nurses perceived the FallTIPS fall prevention program to be efficacious. The FPES mean score of 38.55 (SD = 5.05) and median of 39 were well above the lowest possible score of 13 and scale midpoint of 32.5. Most nurses (N = 270, 90.6%) scored above 33. There were no differences in FPES scores between nurses who had only used FallTIPS and nurses who had previously used a different fall prevention program.

CONCLUSION

The nurses who used FallTIPS perceived that efficiencies in patient care compensated for the time spent on FallTIPS. Nurses valued the program and findings confirmed the importance of patient and family engagement with staff in the fall prevention process. Regardless of the fall prevention program used, organizations should examine staff perceptions of their fall prevention program because programs that are not perceived as being useful, efficient, and valuable will lead to nonadherence over time and then will not reduce falls and injuries. The recently developed FPES used in this study is a brief tool available for organizations to assess nurses' perceptions of the efficacy of their fall prevention program. Additional FPES research is needed with larger and more diverse samples.

An Educational Intervention to Improve Staff Collaboration and Enhance Knowledge of Fall Risk Factors and Prevention Guidelines

BACKGROUND

Magnet®-designated hospitals are seeking to reduce the frequency of falls that lead to injury, which is considered a hospital-acquired condition. Patients with cancer are at high risk to fall, due to multiple factors. Synthesis of the literature supports team efforts and shared learning sessions for patient-care staff as part of the fall prevention process. The purpose was to improve collaboration between Registered Nurses (RNs) and Senior Nurse Aides (SNAs), as well as to enhance their knowledge of fall risk factors and evidence-based prevention guidelines for pediatric oncology patients.

METHODS

An evidence-based practice project was implemented using a quality improvement pilot based on the Magnet® framework. Oncology RNs and SNAs at a large pediatric hospital were invited to attend one of five educational sessions. Pre-and post-session learning was assessed based on an adapted fall risk knowledge assessment tool.

FINDINGS

Thirty participants attended an educational session with 27 (25 RNs and 2 SNAs) matched pre- and post-session assessments. Median post-session assessment scores were statistically significantly higher than pre-session scores (Z =  -3.11, p = 0.001). Overall knowledge scores increased for 63% of participants.

DISCUSSION

An educational intervention focused on pediatric oncology nursing enhanced knowledge of patient-care roles and fall prevention efforts, leading to improved fall outcomes.

APPLICATION TO PRACTICE

Ensuring that RNs and SNAs fully embrace their shared role in harm prevention is vital when considering the complexity of delivering nursing care in our current healthcare environment.

Evaluation of a Patient-Centered Fall-Prevention Tool Kit to Reduce Falls and Injuries: A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial

IMPORTANCE

Falls represent a leading cause of preventable injury in hospitals and a frequently reported serious adverse event. Hospitalization is associated with an increased risk for falls and serious injuries including hip fractures, subdural hematomas, or even death. Multifactorial strategies have been shown to reduce falls in acute care hospitals, but evidence for fall-related injury prevention in hospitals is lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether a fall-prevention tool kit that engages patients and families in the fall-prevention process throughout hospitalization is associated with reduced falls and injurious falls.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This nonrandomized controlled trial using stepped wedge design was conducted between November 1, 2015, and October 31, 2018, in 14 medical units within 3 academic medical centers in Boston and New York City. All adult inpatients hospitalized in participating units were included in the analysis.

INTERVENTIONS

A nurse-led fall-prevention tool kit linking evidence-based preventive interventions to patient-specific fall risk factors and designed to integrate continuous patient and family engagement in the fall-prevention process.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the rate of patient falls per 1000 patient-days in targeted units during the study period. The secondary outcome was the rate of falls with injury per 1000 patient-days.

RESULTS

During the interrupted time series, 37 231 patients were evaluated, including 17 948 before the intervention (mean [SD] age, 60.56 [18.30] years; 9723 [54.17%] women) and 19 283 after the intervention (mean [SD] age, 60.92 [18.10] years; 10 325 [53.54%] women). There was an overall adjusted 15% reduction in falls after implementation of the fall-prevention tool kit compared with before implementation (2.92 vs 2.49 falls per 1000 patient-days [95% CI, 2.06-3.00 falls per 1000 patient-days]; adjusted rate ratio 0.85; 95% CI, 0.75-0.96; P = .01) and an adjusted 34% reduction in injurious falls (0.73 vs 0.48 injurious falls per 1000 patient-days [95% CI, 0.34-0.70 injurious falls per 1000 patient-days]; adjusted rate ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.53-0.88; P = .003).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this nonrandomized controlled trial, implementation of a fall-prevention tool kit was associated with a significant reduction in falls and related injuries. A patient-care team partnership appears to be beneficial for prevention of falls and fall-related injuries.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02969343.

Barriers and Facilitators to Older Adults Participating in Fall-Prevention Strategies After Transitioning Home from Acute Hospitalization: A Scoping Review

Purpose

Approximately, 14% of older adults aged 65 years and over experience a fall within 1 month post-hospital discharge. Adequate self-management may minimize the impact of these falls; however, research is lacking on why some older adults engage in self-management to prevent falls while others do not.

Methods

We conducted a scoping review to identify barriers and facilitators to older adults participating in fall-prevention strategies after transitioning home from acute hospitalization. Eligibility criteria were peer-reviewed journal articles published during 2009-2019 which were written in English and contained any of the following keywords or their synonyms: "fall-prevention," "older adults," "post-discharge" and "transition care." We systematically and selectively summarized the findings of these articles using the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines and the PRISMA-ScR reporting guidelines. Seven bibliographic databases were searched: PubMed/MEDLINE, ERIC, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Scopus, PsycINFO, and Web of Science. We used the Capability-Opportunity-Motivation-Behavior (COM-B) model of health behavior change as a framework to guide the content, thematic analysis, and descriptive results.

Results

Seventeen articles were finally selected. The most frequently mentioned barriers and facilitators for each COM-B dimension differed. Motivation factors include such as older adults lacking inner drive and self-denial of being at risk for falls (barriers) and following-up with older adults and correcting inaccurate perceptions of falls and fall-prevention strategies (facilitators).

Conclusion

This scoping review revealed gaps and future research areas in fall prevention relative to behavioral changes. These findings may enable tailoring feasible fall-prevention interventions for older adults after transitioning home from acute hospitalization.