Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37301972›Full record

ArticleBMC geriatrics2023

Powered mobility device use in residential aged care: a retrospective audit of incidents and injuries.

Natalie C Dickson, Apeksha R Gohil, Carolyn A Unsworth

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC geriatrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Natalie C DicksonInstitute of Health and Wellbeing, Federation University, Gippsland Campus, PO Box 3191, Churchill, VIC, 3841, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0002-5932
Apeksha R GohilInstitute of Health and Wellbeing, Federation University, Gippsland Campus, PO Box 3191, Churchill, VIC, 3841, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2639-8542
Carolyn A UnsworthInstitute of Health and Wellbeing, Federation University, Gippsland Campus, PO Box 3191, Churchill, VIC, 3841, Australia. c.unsworth@federation.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0001-6430-2823
Federation University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPowered wheelchairs and motorised mobility scooters, collectively called powered mobility devices (PMD), are highly valued by older Australians, including those living in residential care, to facilitate personal and community mobility. The number of PMDs in residential aged care is expected to grow proportionally with that of the wider community, however, there is very little literature on supporting residents to use PMDs safely. Prior to developing such supports, it is important to understand the frequency and nature of any incidents experienced by residents whilst using a PMD. The aim of this study was to determine the number and characteristics of PMD use related incidents occurring in a group of residential aged care facilities in a single year in one state in Australia including incident type, severity, assessment, or training received and outcomes on follow-up for PMD users living in residential aged care.

methodsAnalysis of secondary data, including documentation of PMD incidents and injuries for one aged care provider group over 12 months retrospectively. Follow-up data were gathered 9-12 months post incident to review and record the outcome for each PMD user.

resultsNo fatalities were recorded as a direct result of PMD use and 55 incidents, including collisions, tips, and falls, were attributed to 30 residents. Examination of demographics and incident characteristics found that 67% of residents who had incurred incidents were male, 67% were over 80 years of age, 97% had multiple diagnoses and 53% had not received training to use a PMD. Results from this study were extrapolated to project that 4,453 PMD use related incidents occur every year within Australian residential aged care facilities, with the potential for outcomes such as extended recovery, fatality, litigation, or loss of income.

conclusionThis is the first time that detailed incident data on PMD use in residential aged care has been reviewed in an Australian context. Illuminating both the benefits and the potential risks of PMD use emphasizes the need to develop and improve support structures to promote safe PMD use in residential aged care.

Indexed as

AccidentsSelf-Help DevicesWheelchairsAgedAged, 80 and overAustraliaFemaleHomes for the AgedHumansMaleRetrospective StudiesIncidentsInjuriesMobility scooterPowered wheelchair

Identifiers

PMID37301972
PMCPMC10257823
OpenAlexW4380202957

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.