Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35365078›Full record

ArticleBMC geriatrics2022

The use and predictive performance of the Peninsula Health Falls Risk Assessment Tool (PH-FRAT) in 25 residential aged care facilities: a retrospective cohort study using routinely collected data.

Nasir Wabe, Joyce Siette, Karla L Seaman, Amy D Nguyen, Magdalena Z Raban, Jacqueline C T Close, Stephen R Lord, Johanna I Westbrook

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC geriatrics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. 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

8 authors.

Nasir WabeCentre for Health Systems and Safety Research, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. nasir.wabe@mq.edu.au.
Joyce SietteCentre for Health Systems and Safety Research, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Karla L SeamanCentre for Health Systems and Safety Research, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Amy D NguyenCentre for Health Systems and Safety Research, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Magdalena Z RabanCentre for Health Systems and Safety Research, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Jacqueline C T CloseNeuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Stephen R LordNeuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Johanna I WestbrookCentre for Health Systems and Safety Research, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Peninsula Health Falls Risk Assessment Tool (PH-FRAT) is a validated and widely applied tool in residential aged care facilities (RACFs) in Australia. However, research regarding its use and predictive performance is limited. This study aimed to determine the use and performance of PH-FRAT in predicting falls in RACF residents.

methodsA retrospective cohort study using routinely-collected data from 25 RACFs in metropolitan Sydney, Australia from Jul 2014-Dec 2019. A total of 5888 residents aged ≥65 years who were assessed at least once using the PH-FRAT were included in the study. The PH-FRAT risk score ranges from 5 to 20 with a score > 14 indicating fallers and ≤ 14 non-fallers. The predictive performance of PH-FRAT was determined using metrics including area under receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC), sensitivity, specificity, sensitivity

resultsA total of 27,696 falls were reported over 3,689,561 resident days (a crude incident rate of 7.5 falls /1000 resident days). A total of 38,931 PH-FRAT assessments were conducted with a median of 4 assessments per resident, a median of 43.8 days between assessments, and an overall median fall risk score of 14. Residents with multiple assessments had increased risk scores over time. The baseline PH-FRAT demonstrated a low AUROC of 0.57, sensitivity of 26.0% (sensitivity

conclusionsAlthough PH-FRAT is frequently used in RACFs, it demonstrated poor predictive performance raising concerns about its value. Introducing a lower PH-FRAT cut-off score of 10 marginally enhanced its predictive performance. Future research should focus on understanding the feasibility and accuracy of dynamic fall risk predictive tools, which may serve to better identify residents at risk of falls.

Indexed as

Accidental FallsRoutinely Collected Health DataAgedGeriatric AssessmentHumansRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentAccidental fallsAgedFall risk assessmentHome careLong term care facilityPredictive model

Identifiers

PMID35365078
PMCPMC8973529

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.