Explore the vast range of titles available.

Both grip strength and gait speed can be used as markers of muscle function, however, no previous study has examined them in the same population with respect to risk of falls. In this prospective cohort study, utilising data from the ASPirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly (ASPREE) trial and ASPREE-Fracture substudy, we analysed the association of grip strength and gait speed and serious falls in healthy older adults. Grip strength was measured using a handheld dynamometer and gait speed from 3-metre timed walks. Serious falls were confined to those involving hospital presentation. Cox regression was used to calculate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for associations with falls. Over an average of 4.0±1.3 years, amongst 16,445 participants, 1,533 had at least one serious fall. After adjustment for age, sex, physical activity, body mass index, Short Form 12 (state of health), chronic kidney disease, polypharmacy and aspirin, each standard deviation (SD) lower grip strength was associated with 27% (HR 1.27, 95% CI 1.17-1.38) higher risk of falls. The results remained the same for males and females. There was a dose-response relationship in the association between grip strength and falls risk. The higher risk of falls was observed in males in all body mass index (BMI) categories, but only in obese females. The association between gait speed and falls risk was weaker than the association between grip strength and falls risk. All males and only obese females with low grip strength appear to be at the greatest risk of serious falls. These findings may assist in early identification of falls.

Background Falls are a major cause of injury and death among older people. Evidence suggests that people with osteoarthritis (OA) are at a higher risk of falls and fall-related injuries including fractures. While studies demonstrate a link between OA and falls, little is known about the pathways that link falls with demographic factors, OA impairments, activity limitations and participation restrictions. The aim of this study was to identify risk factors for falls and fractures among people with OA or at high risk of developing OA using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) framework. Methods A longitudinal analysis of data from the Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI) dataset was undertaken. Participants were considered to have OA if they reported they had been diagnosed with knee or hip OA by a medical practitioner. Outcomes were self-reported falls and fractures. Potential predictors were classified using the ICF framework. Poisson regression models were used to determine the risk factors for falls and fractures. Results Of the 4796 participants, 2270 (47%) were diagnosed with knee and/or hip OA. A higher proportion of participants with OA reported having had falls (72% vs 63%; p  < 0.0001) and fractures (17% vs 14%; p  = 0.012) than those without OA. Personal factors were found to be stronger predictors of falls and fractures compared to OA impairments, activity limitations and participation restrictions in this sample of participants. After adjusting for potential covariates, self-reported history of falls was a significant predictor of both increased falls (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.50; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.40, 4.60) and fracture risk (IRR 1.38; 95% CI 1.13, 1.69). Conclusions By applying the ICF framework, we have shown that personal factors were more likely to predict falls and fractures rather than OA impairments, environmental factors, activity limitations and participation restrictions in people with OA or at high risk of developing OA. This highlights the importance of questioning patients about their previous falls and past medical history, and using this information to focus our assessment and clinical decision-making processes.

Background Health literacy is an important concept associated with participation in preventive health initiatives, such as falls prevention programs. A comprehensive health literacy measurement tool, appropriate for this population, is required. The aim of this study was to evaluate the measurement properties of the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ) in a cohort of older adults who presented to a hospital emergency department (ED) after a fall. Methods Older adults who presented to an ED after a fall had their health literacy assessed using the HLQ ( n  = 433). Data were collected as part of a multi-centre randomised controlled trial of a falls prevention program. Measurement properties of the HLQ were assessed using Rasch analysis. Results All nine scales of the HLQ were unidimensional, with good internal consistency reliability. No item bias was found for most items (43 of 44). A degree of overall misfit to the Rasch model was evident for six of the nine HLQ scales. The majority of misfit indicated content overlap between some items and does not compromise measurement. A measurement gap was identified for this cohort at mid to high HLQ score. Conclusions The HLQ demonstrated good measurement properties in a cohort of older adults who presented to an ED after a fall. The summation of the HLQ items within each scale, providing unbiased information on nine separate areas of health literacy, is supported. Clinicians, researchers and policy makers may have confidence using the HLQ scale scores to gain information about health literacy in older people presenting to the ED after a fall. Trial registration This study was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, number ACTRN12614000336684 (27 March 2014).

Evidence for effective falls prevention interventions in acute wards is limited. One reason for this may be suboptimal program implementation. This study aimed to identify perceived barriers and enablers of the implementation of the 6-PACK falls prevention program to inform the implementation in a randomised controlled trial. Strategies to optimise successful implementation of 6-PACK were also sought. A mixed-methods approach was applied in 24 acute wards from 6 Australian hospitals. Participants were nurses working on participating wards and senior hospital staff including Nurse Unit Managers; senior physicians; Directors of Nursing; and senior personnel involved in quality and safety or falls prevention. Information on barriers and enablers of 6-PACK implementation was obtained through surveys, focus groups and interviews. Questions reflected the COM-B framework that includes three behaviour change constructs of: capability, opportunity and motivation. Focus group and interview data were analysed thematically, and survey data descriptively. The survey response rate was 60% (420/702), and 12 focus groups (n = 96 nurses) and 24 interviews with senior staff were conducted. Capability barriers included beliefs that falls could not be prevented; and limited knowledge on falls prevention in patients with complex care needs (e.g. cognitive impairment). Capability enablers included education and training, particularly face to face case study based approaches. Lack of resources was identified as an opportunity barrier. Leadership, champions and using data to drive practice change were recognised as opportunity enablers. Motivation barriers included complacency and lack of ownership in falls prevention efforts. Motivation enablers included senior staff articulating clear goals and a commitment to falls prevention; and use of reminders, audits and feedback. The information gained from this study suggests that regular practical face-to-face education and training for nurses; provision of equipment; audit, reminders and feedback; leadership and champions; and the provision of falls data is key to successful falls prevention program implementation in acute hospitals.

Measuring patient reported outcomes can improve the quality and effectiveness of healthcare interventions. The aim of this study was to identify the final set of items that can be included in a patient-reported outcome measure to assess recovery of patients following percutaneous coronary interventions. A consecutive sample of 200 patients registered in the Victorian Cardiac Outcomes Registry participated in a telephone survey 30 days following their percutaneous cardiac procedure. Rasch analysis was used to select the best set of items to form a concise and psychometrically sound patient-reported outcome measure. Key measurement properties assessed included overall fit to the Rasch measurement model, unidimensionality, response formats (thresholds), targeting, internal consistency and measurement invariance. Five items were identified as being reliable and valid measures of patient-reported outcomes: pain or discomfort, shortness of breath, confidence in performing usual activities, feeling unhappy and having trouble sleeping. Data showed overall fit to a Rasch model of expected item functioning (χ2 16.99; p = 0.07) and all items demonstrated unidimensionality (t-test less than 0.05 threshold value). Internal consistency was acceptable (equivalent Cronbach's α 0.65) given there are only five items, but there was a ceiling effect (mean logit score -1.24) with compromised score precision for patients with better recovery. We identified a succinct set of items that can be used in a patient-reported outcome measure following percutaneous coronary interventions. This patient-report outcome measure has good structural validity and acceptable internal consistency. While further psychometric evaluations are recommended, the items identified capture the patient's perspective of their recovery following a percutaneous coronary intervention.

Background RESPOND is a telephone-based falls prevention program for older people who present to a hospital emergency department (ED) with a fall. A randomised controlled trial (RCT) found RESPOND to be effective at reducing the rate of falls and fractures, compared with usual care, but not fall injuries or hospitalisations. This process evaluation aimed to determine whether RESPOND was implemented as planned, and identify implementation barriers and facilitators. Methods A mixed-methods evaluation was conducted alongside the RCT. Evaluation participants were the RESPOND intervention group ( n  = 263) and the clinicians delivering RESPOND ( n  = 7). Evaluation data were collected from participant recruitment and intervention records, hospital administrative records, audio-recordings of intervention sessions, and participant questionnaires. The Rochester Participatory Decision-Making Scale (RPAD) was used to evaluate person-centredness (score range 0 (worst) - 9 (best)). Process factors were compared with pre-specified criteria to determine implementation fidelity. Six focus groups were held with participants ( n  = 41), and interviews were conducted with RESPOND clinicians ( n  = 6). Quantitative data were analysed descriptively and qualitative data thematically. Barriers and facilitators to implementation were mapped to the ‘Capability, Opportunity, Motivation – Behaviour’ (COM-B) behaviour change framework. Results RESPOND was implemented at a lower dose than the planned 10 h over 6 months, with a median (IQR) of 2.9 h (2.1, 4). The majority (76%) of participants received their first intervention session within 1 month of hospital discharge with a median (IQR) of 18 (12, 30) days. Clinicians delivered the program in a person-centred manner with a median (IQR) RPAD score of 7 (6.5, 7.5) and 87% of questionnaire respondents were satisfied with the program. The reports from participants and clinicians suggested that implementation was facilitated by the use of positive and personally relevant health messages. Complex health and social issues were the main barriers to implementation. Conclusions RESPOND, which was previously shown to reduce falls and fractures in the main trial analysis, was found to be delivered in a timely and person-centred manner, at a substantially lower dose, using fewer resource than anticipated. Trial registration This study was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, number ACTRN12614000336684 (27 March 2014).

There is limited evidence to support the effectiveness of falls prevention interventions in the acute hospital setting. The 6-PACK falls prevention program includes a fall-risk tool; 'falls alert' signs; supervision of patients in the bathroom; ensuring patients' walking aids are within reach; toileting regimes; low-low beds; and bed/chair alarms. This study explored the acceptability of the 6-PACK program from the perspective of nurses and senior staff prior to its implementation in a randomised controlled trial. A mixed-methods approach was applied involving 24 acute wards from six Australian hospitals. Participants were nurses working on participating wards and senior hospital staff including: Nurse Unit Managers; senior physicians; Directors of Nursing; and senior personnel involved in quality and safety or falls prevention. Information on program acceptability (suitability, practicality and benefits) was obtained by surveys, focus groups and interviews. Survey data were analysed descriptively, and focus group and interview data thematically. The survey response rate was 60%. Twelve focus groups (n = 96 nurses) and 24 interviews with senior staff were conducted. Falls were identified as a priority patient safety issue and nurses as key players in falls prevention. The 6-PACK program was perceived to offer practical benefits compared to current practice. Nurses agreed fall-risk tools, low-low beds and alert signs were useful for preventing falls (>70%). Views were mixed regarding positioning patients' walking aid within reach. Practical issues raised included access to equipment; and risk of staff injury with low-low bed use. Bathroom supervision was seen to be beneficial, however not always practical. Views on the program appropriateness and benefits were consistent across nurses and senior staff. Staff perceived the 6-PACK program as suitable, practical and beneficial, and were open to adopting the program. Some practical concerns were raised highlighting issues to be addressed by the implementation plan.

Background When tested in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of 31,411 patients, the nurse-led 6-PACK falls prevention program did not reduce falls. Poor implementation fidelity (i.e., program not implemented as intended) may explain this result. Despite repeated calls for the examination of implementation fidelity as an essential component of evaluating interventions designed to improve the delivery of care, it has been neglected in prior falls prevention studies. This study examined implementation fidelity of the 6-PACK program during a large multi-site RCT. Methods Based on the 6-PACK implementation framework and intervention description, implementation fidelity was examined by quantifying adherence to program components and organizational support. Adherence indicators were: 1) falls-risk tool completion; and for patients classified as high-risk, provision of 2) a ‘Falls alert’ sign; and 3) at least one additional 6-PACK intervention. Organizational support indicators were: 1) provision of resources (executive sponsorship, site clinical leaders and equipment); 2) implementation activities (modification of patient care plans; training; implementation tailoring; audits, reminders and feedback; and provision of data); and 3) program acceptability. Data were collected from daily bedside observation, medical records, resource utilization diaries and nurse surveys. Results All seven intervention components were delivered on the 12 intervention wards. Program adherence data were collected from 103,398 observations and medical record audits. The falls-risk tool was completed each day for 75% of patients. Of the 38% of patients classified as high-risk, 79% had a ‘Falls alert’ sign and 63% were provided with at least one additional 6-PACK intervention, as recommended. All hospitals provided the recommended resources and undertook the nine outlined program implementation activities. Most of the nurses surveyed considered program components important for falls prevention. Conclusions While implementation fidelity was variable across wards, overall it was found to be acceptable during the RCT. Implementation failure is unlikely to be a key factor for the observed lack of program effectiveness in the 6-PACK trial. Trial registration The 6-PACK cluster RCT is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, number ACTRN12611000332921 (29 March 2011).

Objective To evaluate the effect of the 6-PACK programme on falls and fall injuries in acute wards. Design Cluster randomised controlled trial. Setting Six Australian hospitals. Participants All patients admitted to 24 acute wards during the trial period. Interventions Participating wards were randomly assigned to receive either the nurse led 6-PACK programme or usual care over 12 months. The 6-PACK programme included a fall risk tool and individualised use of one or more of six interventions: “falls alert” sign, supervision of patients in the bathroom, ensuring patients’ walking aids are within reach, a toileting regimen, use of a low-low bed, and use of a bed/chair alarm. Main outcome measures The co-primary outcomes were falls and fall injuries per 1000 occupied bed days. Results During the trial, 46 245 admissions to 16 medical and eight surgical wards occurred. As many people were admitted more than once, this represented 31 411 individual patients. Patients’ characteristics and length of stay were similar for intervention and control wards. Use of 6-PACK programme components was higher on intervention wards than on control wards (incidence rate ratio 3.05, 95% confidence interval 2.14 to 4.34; P<0.001). In all, 1831 falls and 613 fall injuries occurred, and the rates of falls (incidence rate ratio 1.04, 0.78 to 1.37; P=0.796) and fall injuries (0.96, 0.72 to 1.27; P=0.766) were similar in intervention and control wards. Conclusions Positive changes in falls prevention practice occurred following the introduction of the 6-PACK programme. However, no difference was seen in falls or fall injuries between groups. High quality evidence showing the effectiveness of falls prevention interventions in acute wards remains absent. Novel solutions to the problem of in-hospital falls are urgently needed. Trial registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12611000332921.