Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22695789›Full record

Trial reportAge and ageing2012

Community falls prevention for people who call an emergency ambulance after a fall: an economic evaluation alongside a randomised controlled trial.

Tracey H Sach, Philippa A Logan, Carol A C Coupland, John R F Gladman, Opinder Sahota, Valarie Stoner-Hobbs, Kate Robertson, Vicki Tomlinson, Marie Ward, Anthony J Avery

Open access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Age and ageing, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Interventions for preventing falls in older people living in the community.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Tracey H SachHealth Economics Group, Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich Research Park, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK. t.sach@uea.ac.uk
Philippa A Logan
Carol A C Coupland
John R F Gladman
Opinder Sahota
Valarie Stoner-Hobbs
Kate Robertson
Vicki Tomlinson
Marie Ward
Anthony J Avery
University of Nottingham · GBEast Midlands Ambulance Service NHS Trust · GBLings Bar Hospital · GBNottingham City Council · GBUniversity of East Anglia · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivewe estimated the cost-effectiveness of a community falls prevention service compared with usual care from a National Health Service and personal social services perspective over the 12 month trial period.

designa cost-effectiveness and cost utility analysis alongside a randomised controlled trial

settingcommunity.

participantspeople over 60 years of age living at home or in residential care who had fallen and called an emergency ambulance but were not taken to hospital.

interventionsreferral to community fall prevention services or usual health and social care. MEASUREMENTS: incremental cost per fall prevented and incremental cost per Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs)

resultsa total of 157 participants (82 interventions and 75 controls) were used to perform the economic evaluation. The mean difference in NHS and personal social service costs between the groups was £-1,551 per patient over 1 year (95% CI: £-5,932 to £2,829) comparing the intervention and control groups. The intervention patients experienced on average 5.34 fewer falls over 12 months (95% CI: -7.06 to -3.62). The mean difference in QALYs was 0.070 (95% CI: -0.010 to 0.150) in favour of the intervention group.

conclusionthe community falls prevention service was estimated to be cost-effective in this high-risk group. Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN67535605. (controlled-trials.com).

Indexed as

Accidental FallsAgedAged, 80 and overAmbulancesCost-Benefit AnalysisCosts and Cost AnalysisEmergency Medical ServicesHumansLongitudinal StudiesMiddle AgedQuality-Adjusted Life YearsState MedicineUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID22695789
PMCPMC3424053
OpenAlexW2113995431

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.