Emergency department visits due to severe falls: comparing patient self- reports and general practitioner records: A cross-sectional study.

IF 3.8 2区 医学 Q2 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
Greta Fellhölter, Tim Stuckenschneider, Laura Himmelmann, Tania Zieschang
{"title":"Emergency department visits due to severe falls: comparing patient self- reports and general practitioner records: A cross-sectional study.","authors":"Greta Fellhölter, Tim Stuckenschneider, Laura Himmelmann, Tania Zieschang","doi":"10.1186/s12877-025-06411-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Older individuals who experience a severe fall are at high risk for long-term consequences and require structured follow-up care including risk assessments and secondary prevention (e.g. exercise). Accurate knowledge of pre-existing diagnoses is essential for tailoring interventions. However, identifying these diagnoses in emergency department (ED) is challenging due to time constraints, high workload, potential recall bias after a traumatic event, and limited electronic data exchange across healthcare settings in Germany. This study analyses the concordance between self-reported diagnoses of adults aged > 60 years presenting to the ED after a fall without hospitalisation and diagnostic information provided by their general practitioners (GPs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data from the SeFallED study conducted in Germany were analysed. To analyse concordance, 28 major diagnostic groups (e.g. heart diseases, cancer, lung diseases) were established. Cohen's Kappa assessed the agreement between self-reported and GP-reported diagnoses. Logistic regression identified associations between population characteristics (e.g., cognition, concerns about falling, age) and discordance between self-reported and GP-reported diagnoses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 216 participants (mean age 75.2), with an average of five diagnoses per person, were included. Agreement was almost perfect (K = 0.81-1.0) for Parkinson's disease, substantial (K = 0.61-0.80) for diabetes mellitus and cancer, and moderate (K = 0.41-0.60) for heart and lung diseases. Other conditions showed fair, poor, or no agreement. Age, sex, BMI, cognition, concerns about falling, education, and living arrangements were associated with discordance. Only higher concerns about falling were linked to non-agreement for overall diagnoses.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Overall, there was poor agreement between self-reported and GP-reported diagnoses. Special attention should be given to older adults and individuals with high concerns about falling, as these factors predicted discordance. Participants were more likely to report diseases with more noticeable symptoms and frequent monitoring such as Parkinson's disease or diabetes mellitus. To optimise follow-up care, improving the accuracy of diagnostic information is essential, which may be facilitated by harmonizing patient information across electronic systems (e.g., electronic health cards). Improved communication between GPs and patients regarding existing illnesses is also crucial to enhance the accuracy of patient self-reports.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>DRKS (Deutsches Register für klinische Studien, DRKS00025949, prospectively registered on 4th November, 2021).</p>","PeriodicalId":9056,"journal":{"name":"BMC Geriatrics","volume":"25 1","pages":"757"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12502360/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Geriatrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-025-06411-9","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Older individuals who experience a severe fall are at high risk for long-term consequences and require structured follow-up care including risk assessments and secondary prevention (e.g. exercise). Accurate knowledge of pre-existing diagnoses is essential for tailoring interventions. However, identifying these diagnoses in emergency department (ED) is challenging due to time constraints, high workload, potential recall bias after a traumatic event, and limited electronic data exchange across healthcare settings in Germany. This study analyses the concordance between self-reported diagnoses of adults aged > 60 years presenting to the ED after a fall without hospitalisation and diagnostic information provided by their general practitioners (GPs).

Methods: Data from the SeFallED study conducted in Germany were analysed. To analyse concordance, 28 major diagnostic groups (e.g. heart diseases, cancer, lung diseases) were established. Cohen's Kappa assessed the agreement between self-reported and GP-reported diagnoses. Logistic regression identified associations between population characteristics (e.g., cognition, concerns about falling, age) and discordance between self-reported and GP-reported diagnoses.

Results: A total of 216 participants (mean age 75.2), with an average of five diagnoses per person, were included. Agreement was almost perfect (K = 0.81-1.0) for Parkinson's disease, substantial (K = 0.61-0.80) for diabetes mellitus and cancer, and moderate (K = 0.41-0.60) for heart and lung diseases. Other conditions showed fair, poor, or no agreement. Age, sex, BMI, cognition, concerns about falling, education, and living arrangements were associated with discordance. Only higher concerns about falling were linked to non-agreement for overall diagnoses.

Conclusion: Overall, there was poor agreement between self-reported and GP-reported diagnoses. Special attention should be given to older adults and individuals with high concerns about falling, as these factors predicted discordance. Participants were more likely to report diseases with more noticeable symptoms and frequent monitoring such as Parkinson's disease or diabetes mellitus. To optimise follow-up care, improving the accuracy of diagnostic information is essential, which may be facilitated by harmonizing patient information across electronic systems (e.g., electronic health cards). Improved communication between GPs and patients regarding existing illnesses is also crucial to enhance the accuracy of patient self-reports.

Trial registration: DRKS (Deutsches Register für klinische Studien, DRKS00025949, prospectively registered on 4th November, 2021).

因严重跌倒而到急诊科就诊:比较病人自我报告和全科医生记录:一项横断面研究。
背景:经历严重跌倒的老年人面临长期后果的高风险,需要有组织的随访护理,包括风险评估和二级预防(如运动)。对已有诊断的准确了解对于调整干预措施至关重要。然而,由于时间限制、高工作量、创伤事件后潜在的回忆偏差以及德国医疗机构之间有限的电子数据交换,在急诊科(ED)中识别这些诊断具有挑战性。本研究分析了未住院治疗的跌倒后到急诊科就诊的60岁成人的自我报告诊断与全科医生提供的诊断信息之间的一致性。方法:分析在德国进行的sefell研究的数据。为了分析一致性,建立了28个主要诊断组(如心脏病、癌症、肺病)。科恩的Kappa评估了自我报告和gp报告诊断之间的一致性。逻辑回归确定了人群特征(如认知、对跌倒的担忧、年龄)和自我报告与gp报告诊断之间的不一致之间的关联。结果:共纳入216名参与者(平均年龄75.2岁),平均每人5次诊断。帕金森病的一致性几乎完全(K = 0.81-1.0),糖尿病和癌症的一致性基本(K = 0.61-0.80),心肺疾病的一致性中等(K = 0.41-0.60)。其他条件显示为公平、差或不一致。年龄、性别、身体质量指数、认知、对跌倒的担忧、教育程度和生活安排与不一致有关。只有对摔倒的高度担忧与总体诊断不一致有关。结论:总体而言,自我报告的诊断与gp报告的诊断之间存在较差的一致性。应特别注意老年人和高度担心跌倒的个人,因为这些因素预示着不一致。参与者更有可能报告有更明显症状和频繁监测的疾病,如帕金森病或糖尿病。为了优化后续护理,提高诊断信息的准确性至关重要,这可以通过协调各个电子系统(例如电子健康卡)的患者信息来促进。改善全科医生和患者之间关于现有疾病的沟通对于提高患者自我报告的准确性也至关重要。试验注册:DRKS (Deutsches Register f r klinische studen, DRKS00025949,预计于2021年11月4日注册)。
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
BMC Geriatrics
BMC Geriatrics GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY-
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
7.30%
发文量
873
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Geriatrics is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in all aspects of the health and healthcare of older people, including the effects of healthcare systems and policies. The journal also welcomes research focused on the aging process, including cellular, genetic, and physiological processes and cognitive modifications.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信