Multi-Factorial and Multi-Component Fall Prevention Interventions Initiated From the Emergency Department: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q1 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Lauren T Southerland, Fabrice I Mowbray, Ian A Tarnovsky, Alexander X Lo, Sangil Lee, Kristie Harper, Suzanne V Ryer, Charles L Maddow, Christopher R Carpenter, Aaron J Malsch, Luna Ragsdale, Shan W Liu
{"title":"Multi-Factorial and Multi-Component Fall Prevention Interventions Initiated From the Emergency Department: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Lauren T Southerland, Fabrice I Mowbray, Ian A Tarnovsky, Alexander X Lo, Sangil Lee, Kristie Harper, Suzanne V Ryer, Charles L Maddow, Christopher R Carpenter, Aaron J Malsch, Luna Ragsdale, Shan W Liu","doi":"10.1111/acem.70245","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Fall risk screening and prevention interventions initiated from the Emergency Department (ED) are endorsed by current national guidelines. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of ED-based multi-factorial and multi-component interventions to prevent falls.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of interventions for fall prevention initiated in the ED for older patients (age ≥ 60 years). Multi-component and multi-factorial interventions were included. We excluded studies without a control or comparison group. The published literature was searched from 2019 to May 2024. Risk of bias was assessed with the Newcastle Ottawa tool for observation studies and the Cochrane Risk of Bias v2 for randomized trials. A meta-analysis was completed for the outcomes with multiple studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The search resulted in 6312 abstracts with 2571 duplicates, for 3741 unique citations. A total of 18 studies were included in the systematic review; 5 were rated as high risk of bias/low quality. The articles were heterogenous in the intervention type (8 multi-factorial and 8 multi-component), setting (ED focused vs. outpatient), intervention components (i.e., nurses, physicians, therapists), and size (103-1435 participants). The interventions did not decrease risk of falls at 3 months (risk difference 0.05 95% CI [0.00; 0.09]), 6 months (0.07 [-0.04; 0.18]) or 12 months (-0.02 [-0.11; 0.07]). ED revisits at 1 month (-0.01 [-0.03; 0.00]), 3 months (-0.04 [-0.14; 0.06]), and 12 months (0.02 [-0.05; 0.25]) were also unchanged. Mortality and hospitalization rates were also unaffected. Improvement in functional status was noted in 4 of 5 studies reporting this outcome.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Multi-factorial and multi-component fall prevention interventions initiated from the ED did not decrease falls or recurrent healthcare use. These interventions may improve functional status in older adults at fall risk. Comparisons are limited by the heterogeneity in types of interventions, intervention compliance, and timing of outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":7105,"journal":{"name":"Academic Emergency Medicine","volume":"33 4","pages":"e70245"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13109610/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academic Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.70245","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Fall risk screening and prevention interventions initiated from the Emergency Department (ED) are endorsed by current national guidelines. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of ED-based multi-factorial and multi-component interventions to prevent falls.

Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of interventions for fall prevention initiated in the ED for older patients (age ≥ 60 years). Multi-component and multi-factorial interventions were included. We excluded studies without a control or comparison group. The published literature was searched from 2019 to May 2024. Risk of bias was assessed with the Newcastle Ottawa tool for observation studies and the Cochrane Risk of Bias v2 for randomized trials. A meta-analysis was completed for the outcomes with multiple studies.

Results: The search resulted in 6312 abstracts with 2571 duplicates, for 3741 unique citations. A total of 18 studies were included in the systematic review; 5 were rated as high risk of bias/low quality. The articles were heterogenous in the intervention type (8 multi-factorial and 8 multi-component), setting (ED focused vs. outpatient), intervention components (i.e., nurses, physicians, therapists), and size (103-1435 participants). The interventions did not decrease risk of falls at 3 months (risk difference 0.05 95% CI [0.00; 0.09]), 6 months (0.07 [-0.04; 0.18]) or 12 months (-0.02 [-0.11; 0.07]). ED revisits at 1 month (-0.01 [-0.03; 0.00]), 3 months (-0.04 [-0.14; 0.06]), and 12 months (0.02 [-0.05; 0.25]) were also unchanged. Mortality and hospitalization rates were also unaffected. Improvement in functional status was noted in 4 of 5 studies reporting this outcome.

Conclusions: Multi-factorial and multi-component fall prevention interventions initiated from the ED did not decrease falls or recurrent healthcare use. These interventions may improve functional status in older adults at fall risk. Comparisons are limited by the heterogeneity in types of interventions, intervention compliance, and timing of outcomes.

从急诊科开始的多因素和多成分预防跌倒干预:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景:由急诊科(ED)发起的跌倒风险筛查和预防干预措施得到了当前国家指南的认可。我们的目的是评估基于ed的多因素和多成分干预预防跌倒的有效性。方法:我们对老年患者(年龄≥60岁)在急诊科开始的预防跌倒的干预措施进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析。包括多成分和多因子干预。我们排除了没有对照组或对照组的研究。检索时间为2019年至2024年5月。观察性研究采用Newcastle Ottawa工具评估偏倚风险,随机试验采用Cochrane Risk of bias v2评估偏倚风险。对多项研究的结果进行荟萃分析。结果:检索得到6312篇摘要,重复数2571篇,唯一引用数3741次。系统评价共纳入18项研究;5篇被评为高偏倚风险/低质量。这些文章在干预类型(8个多因素和8个多成分)、环境(ED与门诊)、干预成分(即护士、医生、治疗师)和规模(103-1435名参与者)方面存在异质性。干预措施在3个月时(95% CI[0.00; 0.09])、6个月时(0.07[-0.04;0.18])或12个月时(-0.02[-0.11;0.07])均未降低跌倒风险。1个月(-0.01[-0.03;0.00])、3个月(-0.04[-0.14;0.06])和12个月(0.02[-0.05;0.25])的ED复诊率也没有变化。死亡率和住院率也未受影响。报告这一结果的5项研究中有4项注意到功能状态的改善。结论:从急诊科开始的多因素和多成分预防跌倒干预措施并没有减少跌倒或复发性医疗保健使用。这些干预措施可以改善有跌倒危险的老年人的功能状况。比较受到干预类型、干预依从性和结果时间的异质性的限制。
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
Academic Emergency Medicine
Academic Emergency Medicine 医学-急救医学
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
6.80%
发文量
207
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Academic Emergency Medicine (AEM) is the official monthly publication of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) and publishes information relevant to the practice, educational advancements, and investigation of emergency medicine. It is the second-largest peer-reviewed scientific journal in the specialty of emergency medicine. The goal of AEM is to advance the science, education, and clinical practice of emergency medicine, to serve as a voice for the academic emergency medicine community, and to promote SAEM''s goals and objectives. Members and non-members worldwide depend on this journal for translational medicine relevant to emergency medicine, as well as for clinical news, case studies and more. Each issue contains information relevant to the research, educational advancements, and practice in emergency medicine. Subject matter is diverse, including preclinical studies, clinical topics, health policy, and educational methods. The research of SAEM members contributes significantly to the scientific content and development of the journal.
×
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
小红书