Rehabilitation, Aged and Extended Care, College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders Health and Medical Research Institute, Flinders University of South Australia, Bedford Park, Australia.
EPPI Centre, UCL Social Research Institute, University College London, London WC1H 0NS, United Kingdom.
Age Ageing. 2023 Nov 2;52(11). doi: 10.1093/ageing/afad185.
Multifactorial fall prevention trials providing interventions based on individual risk factors have variable success in aged care facilities. To determine configurations of trial features that reduce falls, intervention component analysis (ICA) and qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) were undertaken.
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from a Cochrane Collaboration review (Cameron, 2018) with meta-analysis data, plus trials identified in a systematic search update to December 2021 were included. Meta-analyses were updated. A theory developed through ICA of English publications of trialist's perspectives was assessed through QCA and a subgroup meta-analysis.
Pooled effectiveness of multifactorial interventions indicated a falls rate ratio of 0.85 (95% confidence interval, CI, 0.65-1.10; I2 = 85%; 11 trials). All tested interventions targeted both environmental and personal risk factors by including assessment of environmental hazards, a medical or medication review and exercise intervention. ICA emphasised the importance of co-design involving facility staff and managers and tailored intervention delivery to resident's intrinsic factors for successful outcomes. QCA of facility engagement plus tailored delivery was consistent with greater reduction in falls, supported by high consistency (0.91) and coverage (0.85). An associated subgroup meta-analysis demonstrated strong falls reduction without heterogeneity (rate ratio 0.61, 95%CI 0.54-0.69, I2 = 0%; 7 trials).
Multifactorial falls prevention interventions should engage aged care staff and managers to implement strategies which include tailored intervention delivery according to each resident's intrinsic factors. Such approaches are consistently associated with a successful reduction in falls, as demonstrated by QCA and subgroup meta-analyses. Co-design approaches may also enhance intervention success.
在老年护理机构中,基于个体风险因素提供干预措施的多因素跌倒预防试验的成功率各不相同。为了确定减少跌倒的试验特征配置,进行了干预成分分析(ICA)和定性比较分析(QCA)。
纳入了 Cochrane 协作组综述(Cameron,2018 年)中的随机对照试验(RCT)及其荟萃分析数据,以及系统搜索更新至 2021 年 12 月的试验。更新了荟萃分析。通过 ICA 对试验者观点的英文出版物进行理论开发,然后通过 QCA 和亚组荟萃分析进行评估。
多因素干预的综合效果表明,跌倒发生率比为 0.85(95%置信区间,CI,0.65-1.10;I2=85%;11 项试验)。所有测试的干预措施都通过评估环境危害、医疗或药物审查以及运动干预来同时针对环境和个人风险因素。ICA 强调了让设施员工和管理人员共同参与并根据居民的内在因素定制干预措施交付的重要性,以获得成功的结果。设施参与度加定制交付的 QCA 与跌倒减少幅度更大一致,其一致性(0.91)和覆盖度(0.85)都很高。一项相关的亚组荟萃分析表明,没有异质性的情况下,跌倒减少的幅度非常大(发生率比 0.61,95%CI 0.54-0.69,I2=0%;7 项试验)。
多因素跌倒预防干预措施应让老年护理机构的员工和管理人员参与进来,实施包括根据每个居民的内在因素定制干预措施交付的策略。正如 QCA 和亚组荟萃分析所表明的那样,这种方法始终与成功降低跌倒率相关。共同设计方法也可能会增强干预的成功。