ArticleAge and ageing2022
A realist evaluation of a multifactorial falls prevention programme in care homes.
Article in Age and ageing, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Rethinking the relationship between ambulatory activity and falls in long-term care: risk versus reward.The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences · 2025Trial
- Exploring the organisation and delivery of falls management in care homes for older people in England.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
- Factors Influencing the Implementation of Evidence-Based Falls Prevention Interventions for Older Persons Living in Residential long-term care settings - An Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews.Journal of frailty, sarcopenia and falls · 2025Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundfalls in care homes are common, costly and hard to prevent.Multifactorial falls programmes demonstrate clinical and cost-effectiveness, but the heterogeneity of the care home sector is a barrier to their implementation. A fuller appreciation of the relationship between care home context and falls programme delivery will guide development and support implementation.
methodsthis is a multi-method process evaluation informed by a realist approach.Data include fidelity observations, stakeholder interviews, focus groups, documentary review and falls-rate data. Thematic analysis of qualitative data and descriptive statistics are synthesised to generate care home case studies.
resultsdata were collected in six care homes where a falls programme was trialled. Forty-four interviews and 11 focus groups complemented observations and document review.The impact of the programme varied. Five factors were identified: (i) prior practice and (ii) training may inhibit new ways of working; (iii) some staff may be reluctant to take responsibility for falls; (iv) some may feel that residents living with dementia cannot be prevented from falling; and, (v) changes to management may disturb local innovation.In some care homes, training and improved awareness generated a reduction in falls without formal assessments being carried out.
conclusionsdifferent aspects of the falls programme sparked different mechanisms in different settings, with differing impact upon falls.The evaluation has shown that elements of a multifactorial falls programme can work independently of each other and that it is the local context (and local challenges faced), which should shape how a falls programme is implemented.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.