Search

Abstract Background The National Health Service (NHS) was tasked in 2001 with developing service provision to prevent falls in older people. We carried out a national survey to provide a description of health and social care funded UK fallers services, and to benchmark progress against current practice guidelines. Methods Cascade approach to sampling, followed by telephone survey with senior member of the fall service. Characteristics of the service were assessed using an internationally agreed taxonomy. Reported service provision was compared against benchmarks set by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). Results We identified 303 clinics across the UK. 231 (76%) were willing to participate. The majority of services were based in acute or community hospitals, with only a few in primary care or emergency departments. Access to services was, in the majority of cases, by health professional referral. Most services undertook a multi-factorial assessment. The content and quality of these assessments varied substantially. Services varied extensively in the way that interventions were delivered, and particular concern is raised about interventions for vision, home hazard modification, medication review and bone health. Conclusion The most common type of service provision was a multi-factorial assessment and intervention. There were a wide range of service models, but for a substantial number of services, delivery appears to fall below recommended NICE guidance.

The objective of this study was to summarize the evidence on the accuracy of screening tools for predicting falling risk in community-living older adults. This study was designed as a systematic review. Prospective studies of clinical fall risk prediction tools that provided data on the number of participants who sustained falls during follow-up were included. We searched six electronic databases and reference lists of studies and review articles. Data were extracted by two reviewers independently, and methodological quality assessment was performed with a modified version of the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies checklist. Twenty-five studies were included. These studies evaluated 29 different screening tools, but only 6 of the tools were evaluated by more than one study. Methodological quality was variable, and many studies were small. No meta-analyses were performed because of heterogeneity. Most tools discriminated poorly between fallers and nonfallers. We found that existing studies are methodologically variable and the results are inconsistent. Insufficient evidence exists that any screening instrument is adequate for predicting falls. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]