Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (11)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lightbody, E.
Right arrow Articles by Lye, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Lightbody, E.
Right arrow Articles by Lye, M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Age and Ageing 2002; 31: 203-210
© 2002, British Geriatrics Society

Research papers

Evaluation of a nurse-led falls prevention programme versus usual care: a randomized controlled trial

Elizabeth Lightbody,2, Caroline Watkins2, Michael Leathley2, Anil Sharma1 and Michael Lye3

1 Department of Medicine for the Elderly, University Hospital Aintree, Liverpool, UK
2 Department of Nursing, University of Central Lancashire, Preston PR1 2HE, UK
3 University Clinical Departments, The Duncan Building, Liverpool, UK

Abstract

Objective: to evaluate a nurse-led management plan and care pathway for older people discharged from an Accident and Emergency Department after a fall.

Design: randomized controlled trial.

Setting: a large teaching hospital.

Subjects: 348 consecutive patients aged 65 or over attending the Accident and Emergency Department with a fall.

Interventions: we randomized patients to falls nurse intervention or usual care. Within 4 weeks, the intervention group received a home assessment to address easily modifiable risk factors for falls. This included assessments of medication, ECG, blood pressure, cognition, visual acuity, hearing, vestibular dysfunction, balance, mobility, feet and footwear. All patients were given advice and education about general safety in the home.

Main outcome measures: Further falls, functional ability, re-attendance at the Accident and Emergency Department and admission to hospital.

Results: at 6 months post-Index fall, 36 patients in the intervention group and 39 patients in the control group had had 89 and 145 falls respectively. Although the intervention group had less falls, this was not significant (P>0.05). Similarly, the intervention group had fewer fall-related admissions and bed days (8 and 69 respectively) than the control group (10 and 233 respectively). The intervention group scored significantly higher in indicators of function (P<0.05) and mobility within the community (P<0.02).

Conclusions: although the differences were not significant, patients in the intervention group had fewer falls, less hospital attendances and spent less time in hospital. Moreover, patients in the intervention group were more functionally independent at 6 months post-Index fall.

Keywords: older people, fall prevention


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Age AgeingHome page
C. L. Spice, W. Morotti, S. George, T. H. S. Dent, J. Rose, S. Harris, and C. J. Gordon
The Winchester falls project: a randomised controlled trial of secondary prevention of falls in older people
Age Ageing, October 1, 2008; (2008) afn192v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Gerontol. A Biol. Sci. Med. Sci.Home page
M. A. Russell, K. D. Hill, I. Blackberry, L. L. Day, and S. C. Dharmage
Falls risk and functional decline in older fallers discharged directly from emergency departments.
J. Gerontol. A Biol. Sci. Med. Sci., October 1, 2006; 61(10): 1090 - 1095.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Evid. Based Nurs.Home page
OTHER ARTICLES NOTED (Nov 01 to 18 Oct 02)
Evid. Based Nurs., January 1, 2003; 6(1): e1 - 1.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.