Skip Navigation

Age and Ageing 2007 36(6):656-662; doi:10.1093/ageing/afm122
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplementary Data
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 (2)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Campbell, A. J.
Right arrow Articles by Robertson, M. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Campbell, A. J.
Right arrow Articles by Robertson, M. C.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Copyright © The Author 2007. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Geriatrics Society.

Rethinking individual and community fall prevention strategies: a meta-regression comparing single and multifactorial interventions

A. John Campbell and M. Clare Robertson

Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Otago Medical School, Dunedin, New Zealand

Address correspondence to: A. john Campbell. Email: john.campbell{at}stonebow.otago.ac.nz

Background guidelines recommend that fall prevention programmes for older people include multifactorial interventions.

Objective we aimed to determine if randomised controlled trial evidence supports interventions with multiple components over single strategies in community based fall prevention.

Methods we searched the literature for trials of interventions aimed at preventing falls. We included trials if they met the following criteria: (i) participants were randomly allocated to intervention and control groups, (ii) all participants were aged 65 years or older, (iii) the majority lived independently in the community, (iv) fall events were recorded prospectively using a diary or calendar during the entire trial and monitored at least monthly, (v) follow up was for 12 months or longer, (vi) at least 70% of participants completed the trial, (vii) all falls during the trial for at least 50 participants were included in the analysis, and (viii) a relative rate ratio with 95% CI comparing the number of falls in the intervention and control groups was reported. We calculated a pooled rate ratio separately for trials testing multifactorial and single interventions and compared their overall efficacy using meta-regression.

Results meta-regression showed that single interventions were as effective in reducing falls as interventions with multiple components (pooled rate ratios 0.77, 95% CI 0.67–0.89 and 0.78, 0.68–0.89 respectively).

Conclusion multifactorial fall prevention interventions are effective for individual patients. However, for community programmes for populations at risk, targeted single interventions are as effective as multifactorial interventions, may be more acceptable and cost effective.

Keywords: accidental falls, elderly, meta-analysis, randomised controlled trials, public health

Received 24 January 2007; accepted in revised form 25 May 2007.


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
L. Day and S. Lord
Individual and community fall prevention strategies
Age Ageing, May 1, 2008; 37(3): 352 - 353.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Age AgeingHome page
A. J. Campbell and M. C. Robertson
Reply
Age Ageing, May 1, 2008; 37(3): 353 - 353.
[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.