Determining fall risk change throughout pregnancy: the accuracy of postpartum survey and relationship to fall efficacy.

IF 2 3区 工程技术 Q3 ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL
Ergonomics Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-12-22 DOI:10.1080/00140139.2023.2296827
Brett C Stewart, Shenghai Dai, Kathryn L Havens, Jeffrey D Eggleston, Jennifer J Bagwell, Rita E Deering, Emily E Little, Robert D Catena
{"title":"Determining fall risk change throughout pregnancy: the accuracy of postpartum survey and relationship to fall efficacy.","authors":"Brett C Stewart, Shenghai Dai, Kathryn L Havens, Jeffrey D Eggleston, Jennifer J Bagwell, Rita E Deering, Emily E Little, Robert D Catena","doi":"10.1080/00140139.2023.2296827","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>All epidemiological studies on pregnancy fall risk to date have relied on postpartum recall. This study investigated the accuracy of postpartum recall of falls that were reported during pregnancy, including assessment of fall efficacy as a possible reason for recall inaccuracy. Twenty participants reported fall experiences weekly during pregnancy, but one participant was excluded as an outlier. A fall efficacy questionnaire was completed every six weeks during pregnancy. A postpartum survey to mimic previous studies (Dunning, Lemasters, and Bhattacharya 2010; Dunning et al. 2003) was delivered to determine recall accuracy. Postpartum recall of fall events each gestational month matches the previous study (Dunning, Lemasters, and Bhattacharya 2010). However, recall of falls is 16% underestimated and recall of all fall events is 30% overestimated in postpartum survey. There is a slight relationship between fall efficacy and true falls, but not between fall efficacy and fall recall. Our study suggests fall risk needs to be intermittently surveyed throughout pregnancy rather than assessed via postpartum survey.<b>Practitioner summary:</b> This study investigated the accuracy of postpartum survey of fall risk during pregnancy and the possibility of fall efficacy as a covariate. We used three corresponding surveys. We found inaccuracies in postpartum survey, not explain by fall efficacy.</p>","PeriodicalId":50503,"journal":{"name":"Ergonomics","volume":" ","pages":"85-94"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ergonomics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2023.2296827","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

All epidemiological studies on pregnancy fall risk to date have relied on postpartum recall. This study investigated the accuracy of postpartum recall of falls that were reported during pregnancy, including assessment of fall efficacy as a possible reason for recall inaccuracy. Twenty participants reported fall experiences weekly during pregnancy, but one participant was excluded as an outlier. A fall efficacy questionnaire was completed every six weeks during pregnancy. A postpartum survey to mimic previous studies (Dunning, Lemasters, and Bhattacharya 2010; Dunning et al. 2003) was delivered to determine recall accuracy. Postpartum recall of fall events each gestational month matches the previous study (Dunning, Lemasters, and Bhattacharya 2010). However, recall of falls is 16% underestimated and recall of all fall events is 30% overestimated in postpartum survey. There is a slight relationship between fall efficacy and true falls, but not between fall efficacy and fall recall. Our study suggests fall risk needs to be intermittently surveyed throughout pregnancy rather than assessed via postpartum survey.Practitioner summary: This study investigated the accuracy of postpartum survey of fall risk during pregnancy and the possibility of fall efficacy as a covariate. We used three corresponding surveys. We found inaccuracies in postpartum survey, not explain by fall efficacy.

确定整个孕期跌倒风险的变化:产后调查的准确性及与跌倒功效的关系。
迄今为止,所有关于孕期跌倒风险的流行病学研究都依赖于产后回忆。本研究调查了产后回忆孕期跌倒情况的准确性,包括评估跌倒功效可能是导致回忆不准确的原因。20 名参与者每周报告一次孕期跌倒经历,但有一名参与者因异常情况而被排除在外。孕期每六周填写一次跌倒功效问卷。为了确定回忆的准确性,我们模仿之前的研究(Dunning、Lemasters 和 Bhattacharya,2010 年;Dunning 等,2003 年)进行了产后调查。产后对每个妊娠月份跌倒事件的回忆与之前的研究(Dunning、Lemasters 和 Bhattacharya,2010 年)一致。然而,在产后调查中,对跌倒的回忆被低估了 16%,对所有跌倒事件的回忆被高估了 30%。跌倒功效与真实跌倒之间有轻微关系,但跌倒功效与跌倒回忆之间没有关系。我们的研究表明,需要在整个孕期对跌倒风险进行间歇性调查,而不是通过产后调查进行评估。从业者总结:本研究调查了产后调查孕期跌倒风险的准确性,以及将跌倒功效作为协变量的可能性。我们使用了三种相应的调查方法。我们发现产后调查存在误差,而跌倒功效并不能解释这一点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ergonomics
Ergonomics 工程技术-工程:工业
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
12.50%
发文量
147
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Ergonomics, also known as human factors, is the scientific discipline that seeks to understand and improve human interactions with products, equipment, environments and systems. Drawing upon human biology, psychology, engineering and design, Ergonomics aims to develop and apply knowledge and techniques to optimise system performance, whilst protecting the health, safety and well-being of individuals involved. The attention of ergonomics extends across work, leisure and other aspects of our daily lives. The journal Ergonomics is an international refereed publication, with a 60 year tradition of disseminating high quality research. Original submissions, both theoretical and applied, are invited from across the subject, including physical, cognitive, organisational and environmental ergonomics. Papers reporting the findings of research from cognate disciplines are also welcome, where these contribute to understanding equipment, tasks, jobs, systems and environments and the corresponding needs, abilities and limitations of people. All published research articles in this journal have undergone rigorous peer review, based on initial editor screening and anonymous refereeing by independent expert referees.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信