Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38481303›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2024

Comparing risk-adjusted inpatient fall rates internationally: validation of a risk-adjustment model using multicentre cross-sectional data from hospitals in Switzerland and Austria.

Niklaus S Bernet, Irma H J Everink, Sabine Hahn, Silvia Bauer, Jos M G A Schols

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
3.4field-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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Niklaus S BernetSchool of Health Professions, Applied Research & Development in Nursing, Bern University of Applied Sciences, Murtenstrasse 10, Bern, 3008, Switzerland. niklausstefan.bernet@bfh.ch.
Irma H J EverinkDepartment of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, PO BOX 616, Maastricht, 6200 MD, the Netherlands.
Sabine HahnSchool of Health Professions, Applied Research & Development in Nursing, Bern University of Applied Sciences, Murtenstrasse 10, Bern, 3008, Switzerland.
Silvia BauerInstitute of Nursing Science, Medical University of Graz, Neue Stiftingtalstraße 6/P06-WEST, 8010, Graz, Austria.
Jos M G A ScholsDepartment of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, PO BOX 616, Maastricht, 6200 MD, the Netherlands.
Bern University of Applied Sciences · CHMaastricht University · NLMedical University of Graz · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInpatient falls in hospitals are an acknowledged indicator of quality of care. International comparisons could highlight quality improvement potential and enable cross-national learning. Key to fair cross-national comparison is the availability of a risk adjustment model validated in an international context. This study aimed to 1) ascertain that the variables of the inpatient fall risk adjustment model do not interact with country and thus can be used for risk adjustment, 2) compare the risk of falling in hospitals between Switzerland and Austria after risk adjustment.

methodsThe data on inpatient falls from Swiss and Austrian acute care hospitals were collected on a single measurement day in 2017, 2018 and 2019 as part of an international multicentre cross-sectional study. Multilevel logistic regression models were used to screen for interaction effects between the patient-related fall risk factors and the countries. The risks of falling in hospital in Switzerland and in Austria were compared after applying the risk-adjustment model.

resultsData from 176 hospitals and 43,984 patients revealed an inpatient fall rate of 3.4% in Switzerland and 3.9% in Austria. Two of 15 patient-related fall risk variables showed an interaction effect with country: Patients who had fallen in the last 12 months (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.10-2.01, p = 0.009) or had taken sedatives/psychotropic medication (OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.05-1.87, p = 0.022) had higher odds of falling in Austrian hospitals. Significantly higher odds of falling were observed in Austrian (OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.13-1.68, p = 0.002) compared to Swiss hospitals after applying the risk-adjustment model.

conclusionsAlmost all patient-related fall risk factors in the model are suitable for a risk-adjusted cross-country comparison, as they do not interact with the countries. Further model validation with additional countries is warranted, particularly to assess the interaction of risk factors "fall in the last 12 months" and "sedatives/psychotropic medication intake" with country variable. The study underscores the crucial role of an appropriate risk-adjustment model in ensuring fair international comparisons of inpatient falls, as the risk-adjusted, as opposed to the non-risk-adjusted country comparison, indicated significantly higher odds of falling in Austrian compared to Swiss hospitals.

Indexed as

InpatientsRisk AdjustmentAccidental FallsAustriaCross-Sectional StudiesHospitalsHumansHypnotics and SedativesSwitzerlandHypnotics and SedativesAccidental fallsBenchmarkingCross-sectional studiesHospitalsInpatientsMultilevel analysisQuality assuranceQuality of health careRisk adjustment

Identifiers

PMID38481303
PMCPMC10935870
OpenAlexW4392751338

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.