Abstract
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 168 - 175 |
| Number of pages | 8 |
| Journal | Journal of Clinical Epidemiology |
| Volume | 59 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2006 |
Cite this
}
A new instrument for targeting falls prevention interventions was accurate and clinically applicable in a hospital setting. / Haines, Terrence Peter; Bennell, Kim L; Osborne, Richard Harry; Hill, Keith.
In: Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, Vol. 59, No. 2, 2006, p. 168 - 175.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Research › peer-review
TY - JOUR
T1 - A new instrument for targeting falls prevention interventions was accurate and clinically applicable in a hospital setting
AU - Haines, Terrence Peter
AU - Bennell, Kim L
AU - Osborne, Richard Harry
AU - Hill, Keith
PY - 2006
Y1 - 2006
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
UR - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16426952
U2 - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.07.017
DO - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.07.017
M3 - Article
VL - 59
SP - 168
EP - 175
JO - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
JF - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
SN - 0895-4356
IS - 2
ER -