J Gerontol Nurs. 2020 Apr 1;46(4):41-47. doi: 10.3928/00989134-20200302-01.
The current study aimed to categorize fall risk appraisal and quantify discrepancies between perceived fall risk measured subjectively using the short Fall Efficacy Scale-International and physiological fall risk measured objectively using the portable BTrackS™ Assess Balance System. One hundred two community-dwelling older adults were evaluated in this cross-sectional study. Approximately 40% of participants had maladaptive fall risk appraisals, which were either irrational (high perceived risk despite low physiological fall risk) or incongruent (low perceived risk but high physiological fall risk). The remaining 60% of participants had adaptive fall risk appraisals, which were either rational (low perceived risk aligned with low physiological fall risk) or congruent (high perceived risk aligned with high physiological fall risk). Among participants with rational, congruent, irrational, and incongruent appraisals, 21.7%, 66.7%, 28%, and 18.8%, respectively, reported having a history of falls (p < 0.01). Using technology to identify discrepancies in perceived and physiological fall risks can potentially increase the success of fall risk screening and guide fall interventions to target perceived or physiological components of balance. [Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 46(4), 41-47.].
本研究旨在对跌倒风险评估进行分类，并量化使用短版 Fall Efficacy Scale-International（FES-I）主观测量的感知跌倒风险与使用便携式 BTrackS™ Assess Balance System（BTrackS）客观测量的生理跌倒风险之间的差异。在这项横断面研究中，对 102 名社区居住的老年人进行了评估。约 40%的参与者存在适应不良的跌倒风险评估，这些评估要么是不合理的（尽管生理跌倒风险低，但感知风险高），要么是不一致的（感知风险低，但生理跌倒风险高）。其余 60%的参与者具有适应性的跌倒风险评估，这些评估要么是合理的（感知风险低与生理跌倒风险低一致），要么是一致的（感知风险高与生理跌倒风险高一致）。在具有理性、一致、不合理和不一致评估的参与者中，分别有 21.7%、66.7%、28%和 18.8%报告有跌倒史（p<0.01）。使用技术识别感知和生理跌倒风险之间的差异可能会提高跌倒风险筛查的成功率，并指导跌倒干预措施针对平衡的感知或生理成分。[老年护理杂志，46(4)，41-47]。
