ArticleBMC geriatrics2025
Intervention to systematize fall risk assessment and prevention in older hospitalized adults: a mixed methods study.
Article in BMC geriatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A five-year retrospective study of patient falls in a tertiary hospital: frequency, characteristics, and contributing factors.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- A pre-post intervention study to improve fall risk assessment in older hospitalised adults: the STROLL study.BMC geriatrics · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFall-prevention interventions are efficient but resource-requiring and should target persons at higher risk of falls. We need to ensure that fall risk is systematically assessed in everyday practice. We conducted a quality improvement (QI) intervention to systematize fall risk assessment and prevention in older adults hospitalized on general internal medicine wards. We evaluated the efficacy of the intervention in a pre-post intervention study and assessed its feasibility and acceptability through a mixed methods process evaluation, which results are reported in here.
methodsThe QI intervention was conducted between 09/2022 and 10/2023 and targeted the nursing staff and residents in two tertiary hospitals of two different language and cultural regions of Switzerland. The intervention comprised an oral presentation, an e-learning, and reminder quizzes. We conducted a process evaluation including 25 interviews and a survey sent to all participants to assess feasibility and acceptability of the intervention. Quantitative data were analyzed descriptively and qualitative data with a mixed deductive and inductive approach. Results were integrated through meta-inferences.
resultsAmong 544 clinicians, 59% completed the e-learning, 74% found the intervention useful, and 25% reported an increase in interprofessional team working. A rewarding system was deemed motivating by 33% of clinicians. Main implementation barrier was the high workload. A concise and clear content as well as regular reminders were perceived as facilitators.
conclusionsA concise and multimodal QI intervention with regular reminders seemed to be feasible and well-accepted. Future QI intervention projects should consider the barriers and facilitators identified in this project to improve quality of care in older hospitalized adults.
trial registrationThe conducted research was not pre-registered.
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.