Fall risk assessment tools for use among older adults in long-term care settings: A systematic review of the literature

Nunan, S; Brown Wilson, C; Henwood, T; Parker, D

Fall risk assessment tools for use among older adults in long-term care settings: A systematic review of the literature

Nunan, S Brown Wilson, C Henwood, T Parker, D

Permalink

Publisher:: Wiley
Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Australasian Journal on Ageing, 2018, 37, (1), pp. 23-33
Issue Date:: 2018-03-01

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	Australas J Ageing - 2017 - Nunan - Fall risk assessment tools for use among older adults in long‐term care settings A.pdf	Published version	221.25 kB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Nunan, S
dc.contributor.author	Brown Wilson, C
dc.contributor.author	Henwood, T
dc.contributor.author	Parker, D https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2552-8613
dc.date.accessioned	2023-04-29T06:11:03Z
dc.date.available	2023-04-29T06:11:03Z
dc.date.issued	2018-03-01
dc.identifier.citation	Australasian Journal on Ageing, 2018, 37, (1), pp. 23-33
dc.identifier.issn	1440-6381
dc.identifier.issn	1741-6612
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/170135
dc.description.abstract	© 2017 AJA Inc. Objective: To conduct a systematic review of published fall risk assessment tools (FRATs) tested for predictive validity among older adults in long-term care (LTC). Methods: A systematic search was conducted using five databases. Only studies reporting on sensitivity and specificity values, conducted in LTC on populations primarily aged over 60 years, were considered. Results: Fifteen papers were included and three different categories of FRATs emerged: multifactorial assessment tools, functional mobility assessments and algorithms. Several FRATs showed moderate-to-good predictive validity and reliability, with the Modified Fall Assessment Tool and the Peninsula Health Falls Risk Assessment Tool (PHFRAT) also demonstrating good feasibility. Conclusion: Evidence for the best choice of FRAT for use in LTC remains limited. Further research is warranted for the PHFRAT, recommended for use in LTC by best practice guidelines, before its establishment as the tool of choice for these clinical settings.
dc.format	Print-Electronic
dc.language	eng
dc.publisher	Wiley
dc.relation.ispartof	Australasian Journal on Ageing
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1111/ajag.12476
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess
dc.subject	11 Medical and Health Sciences, 16 Studies in Human Society, 17 Psychology and Cognitive Sciences
dc.subject.classification	Gerontology
dc.subject.mesh	Accidental Falls
dc.subject.mesh	Aged
dc.subject.mesh	Aged, 80 and over
dc.subject.mesh	Algorithms
dc.subject.mesh	Decision Support Techniques
dc.subject.mesh	Female
dc.subject.mesh	Geriatric Assessment
dc.subject.mesh	Homes for the Aged
dc.subject.mesh	Humans
dc.subject.mesh	Long-Term Care
dc.subject.mesh	Male
dc.subject.mesh	Middle Aged
dc.subject.mesh	Mobility Limitation
dc.subject.mesh	Patient Safety
dc.subject.mesh	Predictive Value of Tests
dc.subject.mesh	Risk Assessment
dc.subject.mesh	Risk Factors
dc.subject.mesh	Humans
dc.subject.mesh	Long-Term Care
dc.subject.mesh	Geriatric Assessment
dc.subject.mesh	Risk Assessment
dc.subject.mesh	Risk Factors
dc.subject.mesh	Predictive Value of Tests
dc.subject.mesh	Accidental Falls
dc.subject.mesh	Algorithms
dc.subject.mesh	Decision Support Techniques
dc.subject.mesh	Aged
dc.subject.mesh	Aged, 80 and over
dc.subject.mesh	Middle Aged
dc.subject.mesh	Homes for the Aged
dc.subject.mesh	Female
dc.subject.mesh	Male
dc.subject.mesh	Mobility Limitation
dc.subject.mesh	Patient Safety
dc.subject.mesh	Accidental Falls
dc.subject.mesh	Aged
dc.subject.mesh	Aged, 80 and over
dc.subject.mesh	Algorithms
dc.subject.mesh	Decision Support Techniques
dc.subject.mesh	Female
dc.subject.mesh	Geriatric Assessment
dc.subject.mesh	Homes for the Aged
dc.subject.mesh	Humans
dc.subject.mesh	Long-Term Care
dc.subject.mesh	Male
dc.subject.mesh	Middle Aged
dc.subject.mesh	Mobility Limitation
dc.subject.mesh	Patient Safety
dc.subject.mesh	Predictive Value of Tests
dc.subject.mesh	Risk Assessment
dc.subject.mesh	Risk Factors
dc.title	Fall risk assessment tools for use among older adults in long-term care settings: A systematic review of the literature
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	37
utslib.location.activity	Australia
utslib.for	1110 Nursing
utslib.for	11 Medical and Health Sciences
utslib.for	16 Studies in Human Society
utslib.for	17 Psychology and Cognitive Sciences
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Strength - CHT - Health Technologies
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Centre for Health Technologies (CHT)
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access	*
pubs.consider-herdc	false
dc.date.updated	2023-04-29T06:11:02Z
pubs.issue	1
pubs.publication-status	Published
pubs.volume	37
utslib.citation.issue	1

Abstract:

© 2017 AJA Inc. Objective: To conduct a systematic review of published fall risk assessment tools (FRATs) tested for predictive validity among older adults in long-term care (LTC). Methods: A systematic search was conducted using five databases. Only studies reporting on sensitivity and specificity values, conducted in LTC on populations primarily aged over 60 years, were considered. Results: Fifteen papers were included and three different categories of FRATs emerged: multifactorial assessment tools, functional mobility assessments and algorithms. Several FRATs showed moderate-to-good predictive validity and reliability, with the Modified Fall Assessment Tool and the Peninsula Health Falls Risk Assessment Tool (PHFRAT) also demonstrating good feasibility. Conclusion: Evidence for the best choice of FRAT for use in LTC remains limited. Further research is warranted for the PHFRAT, recommended for use in LTC by best practice guidelines, before its establishment as the tool of choice for these clinical settings.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/170135