ArticleCureus2024
Assessing Clinicians' Documentation of Vision in Older Adults Who Presented With a Fall at the Accident and Emergency Department of Northampton General Hospital.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Streamlining Patient Fall Prevention and Management Through Human-Centered AI-Based Decision Support Systems.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Falls among elderly adults are one of the most common reasons that could lead to injury and modality, as vision is one of the modifiable risk factors for falls. By assessing it, we can detect those needing further follow-up with opticians or ophthalmologists, lowering the risk of falls secondary to poor vision. Methods Data were collected and reviewed retrospectively from a consecutive list of patients who presented with a fall or head injury to the Accident and Emergency Department at Northampton General Hospital. A total of 180 patients aged 75 years or older were randomly selected between November 2022 and January 2023. This audit measured the vision documentation in the vision assessment tool used in the Emergency Department at Northampton General Hospital and was based on the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) and the Royal College of Physicians guidelines. Results Out of 180 patients in the sample, 34 (19%) had their visual assessments documented. Among them, around six (17.6%) out of 34 patients had a full vision assessment documenting all the sections in the vision assessment tool. Five (14.7%) out of 34 patients and 11 (32.3%) out of 34 patients did not have documentation about their distance and near vision, respectively. The visual fields were not documented in 22 (64.7%) out of 34 patients, and no assessment of the eye movements was reported in 16 (47%) out of 34 patients. Discussion Most of the patients in the Emergency Department lacked visual documentation, resulting in low compliance with the standards. One of the factors that contribute to elderly people's falling is low vision. Uncorrected refractive errors are one of the main causes of poor vision, but their correction is also associated with an increased risk of falls among elderly patients, as they require more time to adapt to changes in prescription (e.g., new glasses). In addition, patients who suffer from some eye conditions, such as glaucoma or macular degeneration, also have a high incidence of falls caused by an impairment of the visual fields. Conclusions All patients over 75 years old who presented with a fall to the Emergency Department should have a vision assessment. Vision documentation is essential to identify patients with vision impairment needing to receive an eye assessment after their discharge to reduce the risk of falls derived from poor vision. Strategies to improve this include training and the dissemination of information (for example, posters), which could help increase documentation rates.
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.