Gait disorders are associated with non-cardiovascular falls in elderly people: a preliminary study

BACKGROUND: The association between unexplained falls and cardiovascular causes is increasingly recognized. Neurally mediated cardiovascular disorders and hypotensive syndromes are found in almost 20 percent of the patients with unexplained falls. However, the approach to these patients remains unclear. Gait assessment might be an interesting approach to these patients as clinical observations suggests that those with cardiovascular or hypotensive causes may not manifest obvious gait alterations. Our primary objective is to analyze the association between gait disorders and a non-cardiovascular cause of falls in patients with unexplained falls. A second objective is to test the sensitivity and specificity of a gait assessment approach for detecting non-cardiovascular causes when compared with intrinsic-extrinsic classification. METHODS: Cross-sectional study performed in a falls clinic at a university hospital in 41 ambulatory elderly participants with unexplained falls. Neurally mediated cardiovascular conditions, neurological diseases, gait and balance problems were assessed. Gait disorder was defined as a gait velocity < 0.8 m/s or Tinetti Gait Score <9. An attributable etiology of the fall was determined in each participant. Comparisons between the gait assessment approach and the attributable etiology regarding a neurally mediated cardiovascular cause were performed. Fisher exact test was used to test the association hypothesis. Sensitivity and specificity of gait assessment approach and intrinsic-extrinsic classification to detect a non-cardiovascular mediated fall was calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI95%). RESULTS: A cardiovascular etiology (orthostatic and postprandial hypotension, vasovagal syndrome and carotid sinus hypersensitivity) was identified in 14% of participants (6/41). Of 35 patients with a gait disorder, 34 had a non-cardiovascular etiology of fall; whereas in 5 out of 6 patients without a gait disorder, a cardiovascular diagnosis was identified (p < 0.001). Sensitivity and specificity of the presence of gait disorder for identifying a non-cardiovascular mediated cause was 97.1% (CI95% = 85–99) and 83% (CI95% = 36–99), respectively. CONCLUSION: In community dwelling older persons with unexplained falls, gait disorders were associated with non-cardiovascular diagnosis of falls. Gait assessment was a useful approach for the detection of a non-cardiovascular mediated cause of falls, providing additional value to this assessment

A risk profile for identifying community-dwelling elderly with a highrisk of recurrent falling: results of a 3-year prospective study

Introduction: The aim of the prospective study reported here was to develop a risk profile that can be used to identify community-dwelling elderly at a high risk of recurrent falling. Materials and methods: The study was designed as a 3-year prospective cohort study. A total of 1365 community-dwelling persons, aged 65 years and older, of the population-based Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam participated in the study. During an interview in 1995/1996, physical, cognitive, emotional and social aspects of functioning were assessed. A follow-up on the number of falls and fractures was conducted during a 3-year period using fall calendars that participants filled out weekly. Recurrent fallers were identified as those who fell at least twice within a 6-month period during the 3-year follow-up. Results: The incidence of recurrent falls at the 3-year follow-up point was 24.9% in women and 24.4% in men. Of the respondents, 5.5% reported a total of 87 fractures that resulted from a fall, including 20 hip fractures, 21 wrist fractures and seven humerus fractures. Recurrent fallers were more prone to have a fall-related fracture than those who were not defined as recurrent fallers (11.9% vs. 3.4%; OR: 3.8; 95% CI: 2.3-6.1). Backward logistic regression analysis identified the following predictors in the risk profile for recurrent falling: two or more previous falls, dizziness, functional limitations, weak grip strength, low body weight, fear of falling, the presence of dogs/cats in the household, a high educational level, drinking 18 or more alcoholic consumptions per week and two interaction terms (high educationx18 or more alcohol consumptions per week and two or more previous falls x fear of falling) (AUC=0.71). Discussion: At a cut-off point of 5 on the total risk score (range 0-30), the model predicted recurrent falling with a sensitivity of 59% and a specificity of 71%. At a cut-off point of 10, the sensitivity and specificity were 31% and 92%, respectively. A risk profile including nine predictors that can easily be assessed seems to be a useful tool for the identification of community-dwelling elderly with a high risk of recurrent falling. © International Osteoporosis Foundation and National Osteoporosis Foundation 2006

Feasibility of a cognitive behavioural group intervention to reduce fear of falling and associated avoidance of activity in community-living older people: a process evaluation

BACKGROUND: Fear of falling and associated avoidance of activity are common among older people and may have negative consequences in terms of functional decline, quality of life and institutionalisation. We evaluated the effects of a cognitive behavioural group intervention to reduce fear of falling and associated avoidance of activity among older persons. This intervention showed favourable effects on fear of falling, avoidance of activity, daily activity, and several secondary outcomes. The aim of the present study is to assess the feasibility of this cognitive behavioural group intervention for participants and facilitators. METHODS: The intervention consisted of eight weekly group sessions lasting two hours each and a booster session after six months. Self-administered questionnaires, registration forms and interviews were used to collect data from participants (n = 168) and facilitators (n = 6) on the extent to which the intervention was performed according to protocol, participant attendance, participant adherence, and participants' and facilitators' opinion of the intervention. Quantitative data from the questionnaires and registration forms were analysed by means of descriptive statistics. Qualitative data were categorised based on matching contents of the answers. RESULTS: Facilitators reported no major protocol deviations. Twenty-six percent of the participants withdrew before the start of the programme. Of the persons who started the programme, 84% actually completed it. The participants reported their adherence as good, but facilitators had a less favourable opinion of this. The majority of participants still reported substantial benefits from the programme after six and twelve months of follow-up (71% and 61% respectively). Both participants and facilitators provided suggestions for improvement of the intervention. CONCLUSION: Results of this study show that the current cognitive behavioural group intervention is feasible for both participants and facilitators and fits in well with regular care. Minor refinement of the intervention, however, is warranted to further improve intervention effectiveness and efficiency. Based on these positive findings, we recommend implementing a refined version of this effective and feasible intervention in regular care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN43792817

Evaluating an intervention to reduce fear of falling and associated activity restriction in elderly persons: design of a randomised controlled trial [ISRCTN43792817]

BACKGROUND: Fear of falling and associated activity restriction is common in older persons living in the community. Adverse consequences of fear of falling and associated activity restriction, like functional decline and falls, may have a major impact on physical, mental and social functioning of these persons. This paper presents the design of a trial evaluating a cognitive behavioural group intervention to reduce fear of falling and associated activity restriction in older persons living in the community. METHODS/DESIGN: A two-group randomised controlled trial was developed to evaluate the intervention. Persons 70 years of age or over and still living in the community were eligible for study if they experienced at least some fear of falling and associated activity restriction. A random community sample of elderly people was screened for eligibility; those eligible for study were measured at baseline and were subsequently allocated to the intervention or control group. Follow-up measurements were carried out directly after the intervention period, and then at six months and 12 months after the intervention. People allocated to the intervention group were invited to participate in eight weekly sessions of two hours each and a booster session. This booster session was conducted before the follow-up measurement at six months after the intervention. People allocated to the control group received no intervention as a result of this trial. Both an effect evaluation and a process evaluation were performed. The primary outcome measures of the effect evaluation are fear of falling, avoidance of activity due to fear of falling, and daily activity. The secondary outcome measures are perceived general health, self-rated life satisfaction, activities of daily life, feelings of anxiety, symptoms of depression, social support interactions, feelings of loneliness, falls, perceived consequences of falling, and perceived risk of falling. The outcomes of the process evaluation comprise the performance of the intervention according to protocol, the attendance and adherence of participants, and the participants' and facilitators' opinion about the intervention. Data of the effect evaluation will be analysed according the intention-to-treat and on-treatment principle. Data of the process evaluation will be analysed using descriptive techniques

Multifactorial day hospital intervention to reduce falls in high risk older people in primary care: a multi-centre randomised controlled trial [ISRCTN46584556]

Falls in older people are a major public health concern in terms of morbidity, mortality and cost. Previous studies suggest that multifactorial interventions can reduce falls, and many geriatric day hospitals are now offering falls intervention programmes. However, no studies have investigated whether these programmes, based in the day hospital are effective, nor whether they can be successfully applied to high-risk older people screened in primary care. The hypothesis is that a multidisciplinary falls assessment and intervention at Day hospitals can reduce the incidence of falls in older people identified within primary care as being at high risk of falling. This will be tested by a pragmatic parallel-group randomised controlled trial in which the participants, identified as at high risk of falling, will be randomised into either the intervention Day hospital arm or to a control (current practice) arm. Those participants preferring not to enter the full randomised study will be offered the opportunity to complete brief diaries only at monthly intervals. This data will be used to validate the screening questionnaire. Three day hospitals (2 Nottingham, 1 Derby) will provide the interventions, and the University of Nottingham's Departments of Primary Care, the Division of Rehabilitation and Ageing Unit, and the Trent Institute for Health Service Research will provide the methodological and statistical expertise. Four hundred subjects will be randomised into the two arms. The primary outcome measure will be the rate of falls over one year. Secondary outcome measures will include the proportion of people experiencing at least one fall, the proportion of people experiencing recurrent falls (>1), injuries, fear of falling, quality of life, institutionalisation rates, and use of health services. Cost-effectiveness analyses will be performed to inform health commissioners about resource allocation issues. The importance of this trial is that the results may be applicable to any UK day hospital setting. SITES: General practices across Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire. Day hospitals: Derbyshire Royal Infirmary (Southern Derbyshire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust) Sherwood Day Service (Nottingham City Hospital Trust) Leengate Day Hospital (Queen's Medical Centre Nottingham University Hospital NHS Trust

EXercising with Computers in Later Life (EXCELL) - pilot and feasibility study of the acceptability of the Nintendo® WiiFit in community-dwelling fallers

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Evidence supporting the best clinical management of patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy: a systematic guideline review and expert consensus

This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Wiley via the DOI in this record.The complexity and heterogeneity of patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy renders traditional disease-oriented guidelines often inadequate and complicates clinical decision making. To address this challenge, guidelines have been developed on multimorbidity or polypharmacy. To systematically analyse their recommendations, we conducted a systematic guideline review using the Ariadne principles for managing multimorbidity as analytical framework. The information synthesis included a multistep consensus process involving 18 multidisciplinary experts from seven countries. We included eight guidelines (four each on multimorbidity and polypharmacy) and extracted about 250 recommendations. The guideline addressed (i) the identification of the target population (risk factors); (ii) the assessment of interacting conditions and treatments: medical history, clinical and psychosocial assessment including physiological status and frailty, reviews of medication and encounters with healthcare providers highlighting informational continuity; (iii) the need to incorporate patient preferences and goal setting: eliciting preferences and expectations, the process of shared decision making in relation to treatment options and the level of involvement of patients and carers; (iv) individualized management: guiding principles on optimization of treatment benefits over possible harms, treatment communication and the information content of medication/care plans; (v) monitoring and follow-up: strategies in care planning, self-management and medication-related aspects, communication with patients including safety instructions and adherence, coordination of care regarding referral and discharge management, medication appropriateness and safety concerns. The spectrum of clinical and self-management issues varied from guiding principles to specific recommendations and tools providing actionable support. The limited availability of reliable risk prediction models, feasible interventions of proven effectiveness and decision aids, and limited consensus on appropriate outcomes of care highlight major research deficits. An integrated approach to both multimorbidity and polypharmacy should be considered in future guidelines.Journal of Internal MedicineKarolinska Institutet Strategic Research Area in Epidemiology (SfoEpi

Don't lose sight of the importance of the individual in effective falls prevention interventions

Falls remain a major public health problem, despite strong growth in the research evidence of effective single and multifactorial interventions, particularly in the community setting. A number of aspects of falls prevention require individual tailoring, despite limitations being reported regarding some of these, including questions being raised regarding the role of falls risk screening and falls risk assessment. Being able to personalise an individual's specific risk and risk factors, increase their understanding of what interventions are likely to be effective, and exploring options of choice and preference, can all impact upon whether or not an individual undertakes and sustains participation in one or more recommendations, which will ultimately influence outcomes. On all of these fronts, the individual patient receiving appropriate and targeted interventions that are meaningful, feasible and that they are motivated to implement, remains central to effective translation of falls prevention research evidence into practice