A new instrument for targeting falls prevention interventions was accurate and clinically applicable in a hospital setting

Terrence Peter Haines, Kim L Bennell, Richard Harry Osborne, Keith Hill

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

35 Citations (Scopus)


Background and objective: to describe the diagnostic accuracy and practical application of the Peter James Centre Falls Risk Assessment Tool (PJC-FRAT), a multidiscriplinary falls risk screening and intervention deployment instrument. Methods: In phase 1, the accuracy of the PJC-FRAT was prospectively compared to a gold standard (the STRATIFY) on a cohort of subacute hospital patients (n = 122). In phase 2, the PJC-FRAT was temporally reassessed using a subsequent cohort (n = 316), with results compared to those of phase 1. Primary outcomes were falls (events), fallers (patients who fell), and hospital completion rates of the PJC-FRAT). Results. In phase 1, PJC-FRAT accuracy of identifying fallers showed sensitivity of 73 (bootstrap 95 confidence interval CI = 55, 90) and specificity of 75 (95 CI = 66, 83), compared with the STRATIFY (cutoff > 2/5) sensitivity of 77 (95 CI = 59, 92) and specificity of 51 (95 CI = 41, 61). This difference was not significant. In phase 2, accuracy of nursing staff using the PJC-FRAT was lower. PJC-FRAT completion rates varied among disciplines over both phases: nurses and physiotherapists, >90 ; occupational therapists, > 82 ; and medical officers, >57 . Conclusion: The PJC-FRAT was practical and relatively accurate as a predictor of falls and a deployment instrument for falls prevention interventions, although continued staff education may be necessary to maintain its accuracy.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)168 - 175
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Clinical Epidemiology
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 2006

Cite this