IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0041061.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Can Falls Risk Prediction Tools Correctly Identify Fall-Prone Elderly Rehabilitation Inpatients? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Bruno Roza da Costa
  • Anne Wilhelmina Saskia Rutjes
  • Angelico Mendy
  • Rosalie Freund-Heritage
  • Edgar Ramos Vieira

Abstract

Background: Falls of elderly people may cause permanent disability or death. Particularly susceptible are elderly patients in rehabilitation hospitals. We systematically reviewed the literature to identify falls prediction tools available for assessing elderly inpatients in rehabilitation hospitals. Methods and Findings: We searched six electronic databases using comprehensive search strategies developed for each database. Estimates of sensitivity and specificity were plotted in ROC space graphs and pooled across studies. Our search identified three studies which assessed the prediction properties of falls prediction tools in a total of 754 elderly inpatients in rehabilitation hospitals. Only the STRATIFY tool was assessed in all three studies; the other identified tools (PJC-FRAT and DOWNTON) were assessed by a single study. For a STRATIFY cut-score of two, pooled sensitivity was 73% (95%CI 63 to 81%) and pooled specificity was 42% (95%CI 34 to 51%). An indirect comparison of the tools across studies indicated that the DOWNTON tool has the highest sensitivity (92%), while the PJC-FRAT offers the best balance between sensitivity and specificity (73% and 75%, respectively). All studies presented major methodological limitations. Conclusions: We did not identify any tool which had an optimal balance between sensitivity and specificity, or which were clearly better than a simple clinical judgment of risk of falling. The limited number of identified studies with major methodological limitations impairs sound conclusions on the usefulness of falls risk prediction tools in geriatric rehabilitation hospitals.

Suggested Citation

  • Bruno Roza da Costa & Anne Wilhelmina Saskia Rutjes & Angelico Mendy & Rosalie Freund-Heritage & Edgar Ramos Vieira, 2012. "Can Falls Risk Prediction Tools Correctly Identify Fall-Prone Elderly Rehabilitation Inpatients? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(7), pages 1-8, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0041061
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0041061
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0041061
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0041061&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0041061?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Roger M. Harbord & Penny Whiting, 2009. "metandi: Meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy using hierarchical logistic regression," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 9(2), pages 211-229, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Joanna Jellett & Cylie Williams & Diana Clayton & Virginia Plummer & Terry Haines, 2020. "Falls risk score removal does not impact inpatient falls: A stepped‐wedge, cluster‐randomised trial," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(23-24), pages 4505-4513, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Garifallia Sakellariou & Carlo Alberto Scirè & Antonella Zambon & Roberto Caporali & Carlomaurizio Montecucco, 2013. "Performance of the 2010 Classification Criteria for Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Literature Review and a Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(2), pages 1-10, February.
    2. Amin Jan & Maran Marimuthu & Muhammad Kashif Shad & Haseeb ur-Rehman & Muhammad Zahid & Ahmad Ali Jan, 2019. "Bankruptcy profile of the Islamic and conventional banks in Malaysia: a post-crisis period analysis," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 67-87, February.
    3. Samuel N. Frempong & Andrew J. Sutton & Clare Davenport & Pelham Barton, 2020. "Early Economic Evaluation to Identify the Necessary Test Characteristics of a New Typhoid Test to be Cost Effective in Ghana," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 143-157, March.
    4. Lütjens, Henk & Eisenbeiss, Maik & Fiedler, Maximilian & Bijmolt, Tammo, 2022. "Determinants of consumers’ attitudes towards digital advertising – A meta-analytic comparison across time and touchpoints," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 445-466.
    5. Lisa A Waddell & Judy Greig & Mariola Mascarenhas & Shannon Harding & Robbin Lindsay & Nicholas Ogden, 2016. "The Accuracy of Diagnostic Tests for Lyme Disease in Humans, A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of North American Research," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(12), pages 1-23, December.
    6. Ian R. White, 2011. "Multivariate random-effects meta-regression: Updates to mvmeta," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 11(2), pages 255-270, June.
    7. Emily H Stewart & Brian Davis & B Lee Clemans-Taylor & Benjamin Littenberg & Carlos A Estrada & Robert M Centor, 2014. "Rapid Antigen Group A Streptococcus Test to Diagnose Pharyngitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(11), pages 1-1, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0041061. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.