Practical and validated tool to assess falls risk in the primary care setting:A systematic review

Objective: Although several falls risk assessment tools are available, it is unclear which have been validated and which would be most suitable for primary care practices. This systematic review aims to identify the most suitable falls risk assessment tool for the primary care setting (ie, requires limited time, no expensive equipment and no additional space) and that has good predictive performance in the assessment of falls risk among older people living independently. Design: A systematic review based on prospective studies. Methods: An extensive search was conducted in the following databases: PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane and PsycINFO. Tools were excluded if they required expensive and/or advanced software that is not usually available in primary care units and if they had not been validated in at least three different studies. Of 2492 articles published between January 2000 and July 2020, 27 were included. Results: Six falls risk assessment tools were identified: Timed Up and Go (TUG) test, Gait Speed test, Berg Balance Scale, Performance Oriented Mobility Assessment, Functional Reach test and falls history. Most articles reported area under the curve (AUC) values ranging from 0.5 to 0.7 for these tools. Sensitivity and specificity varied substantially across studies (eg, TUG, sensitivity:10%–83.3%, specificity:28.4%–96.6%). Conclusions: Given that none of the falls risk assessment tools had sufficient predictive performance (AUC <0.7), other ways of assessing high falls risk among independently living older people in primary care should be investigated. For now, the most suitable way to assess falls risk in the primary care setting appears to involve asking patients about their falls history. Compared with the other five tools, the falls history requires the least amount of time, no expensive equipment, no training and no spatial adjustments. The clinical judgement of healthcare professionals continues to be most important, as it enables the identification of high falls risk even for patients with no falls history. Trial registraion number: The Netherlands Trial Register, NL7917; Pre-results

Unravelling networks in local public health policymaking in three European countries:a systems analysis

Background: Facilitating and enhancing interaction between stakeholders involved in the policymaking process to stimulate collaboration and use of evidence, is important to foster the development of effective Health Enhancing Physical Activity (HEPA) policies. Performing an analysis of real-world policymaking processes will help reveal the complexity of a network of stakeholders. Therefore, the main objectives were to unravel the stakeholder network in the policy process by conducting three systems analyses, and to increase insight into the similarities and differences in the policy processes of these European country cases.Methods: A systems analysis of the local HEPA policymaking process was performed in three European countries involved in the 'REsearch into POlicy to enhance Physical Activity' (REPOPA) project, resulting in three schematic models showing the main stakeholders and their relationships. The models were used to compare the systems, focusing on implications with respect to collaboration and use of evidence in local HEPA policymaking. Policy documents and relevant webpages were examined and main stakeholders were interviewed.Results: The systems analysis in each country identified the main stakeholders involved and their position and relations in the policymaking process. The Netherlands and Denmark were the most similar and both differed most from Romania, especially at the level of accountability of the local public authorities for local HEPA policymaking. The categories of driving forces underlying the relations between stakeholders were formal relations, informal interaction and knowledge exchange.Conclusions: A systems analysis providing detailed descriptions of positions and relations in the stakeholder network in local level HEPA policymaking is rather unique in this area. The analyses are useful when a need arises for increased interaction, collaboration and use of knowledge between stakeholders in the local HEPA network, as they provide an overview of the stakeholders involved and their mutual relations. This information can be an important starting point to enhance the uptake of evidence and build more effective public health policies

Towards quality criteria for regional public health reporting: concept mapping with Dutch experts

Background: In the Netherlands, municipal health assessments are carried out by 28 Regional Health Services, serving 418 municipalities. In the absence of guidelines, regional public health reports were developed in two pilot regions on the basis of the model and experience of national health reporting. Though they were well received and positively evaluated, it was not clear which specific characteristics determined ‘good public health reporting’. Therefore, this study was set up to develop a theoretical framework for the quality of regional public health reporting in The Netherlands. Methods: Using concept mapping as a standardized tool for conceptualization, 35 relevant reporting experts formulated short statements in two different brainstorming sessions, describing specific quality criteria of regional public health reports. After the removal of duplicates, the list was supplemented with international criteria, and the statements were sent to each participant for rating and sorting. The results were processed statistically and represented graphically. The output was discussed and interpreted, leading to the final concept map. Results: The final concept map consisted of 97 criteria, grouped into 13 clusters, and plotted in two dimensions: a ‘product’ dimension, ranging from ‘production’ to ‘content’, and a ‘context’ dimension, ranging from ‘science’ to ‘policy’. The three most important clusters were: (i) ‘solution orientation’, (ii) ‘policy relevance’ and (iii) ‘policy impact’. Conclusion: This study provided a theoretical framework for the quality of regional public health reporting, indicating relevant domains and criteria. Further work should translate domains and criteria into operational indicators for evaluating regional public health reports

Practical and validated tool to assess falls risk in the primary care setting: A systematic review

Objective: Although several falls risk assessment tools are available, it is unclear which have been validated and which would be most suitable for primary care practices. This systematic review aims to identify the most suitable falls risk assessment tool for the primary care setting (ie, requires limited time, no expensive equipment and no additional space) and that has good predictive performance in the assessment of falls risk among older people living independently. Design: A systematic review based on prospective studies. Methods: An extensive search was conducted in the following databases: PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane and PsycINFO. Tools were excluded if they required expensive and/or advanced software that is not usually available in primary care units and if they had not been validated in at least three different studies. Of 2492 articles published between January 2000 and July 2020, 27 were included. Results: Six falls risk assessment tools were identified: Timed Up and Go (TUG) test, Gait Speed test, Berg Balance Scale, Performance Oriented Mobility Assessment, Functional Reach test and falls history. Most articles reported area under the curve (AUC) values ranging from 0.5 to 0.7 for these tools. Sensitivity and specificity varied substantially across studies (eg, TUG, sensitivity:10%–83.3%, specificity:28.4%–96.6%). Conclusions: Given that none of the falls risk assessment tools had sufficient predictive performance (AUC <0.7), other ways of assessing high falls risk among independently living older people in primary care should be investigated. For now, the most suitable way to assess falls risk in the primary care setting appears to involve asking patients about their falls history. Compared with the other five tools, the falls history requires the least amount of time, no expensive equipment, no training and no spatial adjustments. The clinical judgement of healthcare professionals continues to be most important, as it enables the identification of high falls risk even for patients with no falls history. Trial registraion number: The Netherlands Trial Register, NL7917; Pre-results

The opinion of adolescents and adults on Dutch restrictive and educational alcohol policy measures

Objectives The main objective of this study is to explore the opinion of 16-22-year olds on alcohol policy measures compared to the opinion of adults older than 22 years.Methods Data was collected in 2008 by using a Dutch panel. This panel was based on a representative probability of households with 8280 members of 16 years and older. The study had a cross-sectional design and questionnaires were filled out through internet.Results According measures related to the availability of alcohol, the 16-18- and 19-22-year olds are significantly more negative about these policy measures than the respondents older than 22 years. Educational measures were more popular than restrictive availability measures among all three groups, and the opinions of the groups differed significantly from each other. Own alcohol use seemed to be the main predictor for the opinion on restrictive availability measures.Conclusions The 16-22-year olds are more negative regarding restrictive availability measures and educational measures than adults older than 22 years, and the restrictive availability measures are less popular than the educational measures among the adolescents.Opinion Alcohol Policy Adolescents Survey

Multi-sector policy action to create activity-friendly environments for children: A multiple-case study

Objectives The aim of this study is (1) to gain insight into current multi-sector policy initiatives that contribute to activity-friendly environments for children in four Dutch municipalities, (2) to investigate the role of multi-sector collaboration in multi-sector policy action and (3) to gain insight into critical facilitators and possible challenges for multi-sector policy action aimed at creating activity-friendly environments for children.Methods A policy analysis was conducted in four Dutch municipalities by means of semi-structured interviews with 25 policy officers from different policy sectors. Interviews were transcribed ad verbatim and analyzed using qualitative data coding software.Results Each policy sector carried out policy measures related to (the environmental determinants of) physical activity among children, but most respondents were not aware of the potential effectiveness of their policy measures regarding this topic. In two municipalities structural collaboration between policy sectors was present, but the number of sectors involved was limited. Awareness and support among all policy sectors, a stimulating political environment, and knowing each other and being informed about other sectors' policies were mentioned as facilitators for multi-sector policy action. The main challenge for multi-sector policy action was lack of time and resources.Conclusions This study shows that multi-sector policy action aimed at activity-friendly environments could be stimulated by raising awareness and defining problem ownership, enhancing multi-sector collaboration and paying attention to facilitators and challenges.Physical activity Children Environment Public health Health policy Policy analysis