Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41111684›Full record

ArticleCureus2025

Visual Assessment in Elderly Inpatients Following a Fall.

Saeed Azizi, Omar Hawwa, Ali Istanaksai, Hadyn Kankam, Nadeem Ali

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Saeed AziziOphthalmology, Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, GBR.
Omar HawwaMedicine, St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, GBR.
Ali IstanaksaiMedicine, North Middlesex University Hospital, London, GBR.
Hadyn KankamMedicine, St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, GBR.
Nadeem AliOphthalmology, London Squint Clinic, London, GBR.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction Falls are a major cause of morbidity in older adults, with visual impairment recognized as a key modifiable risk factor. National guidelines recommend vision assessment following a fall; however, adherence remains suboptimal. This quality improvement project aimed to evaluate compliance with national recommendations and implement interventions to improve visual assessment rates in elderly inpatients. Methods A two-cycle retrospective cross-sectional review was conducted at a tertiary hospital in London. Electronic records of inpatients aged ≥65 admitted across two time points, one year apart, were analyzed. The first cycle assessed baseline documentation of vision assessments, defined as visual acuity (VA) or confrontational fields. Interventions included staff education sessions, distribution of visual prompts, and improved access to bedside VA tools. A re-audit was performed post-intervention to evaluate the impact. Results A total of 337 patient records were reviewed (181 pre-intervention; 156 post-intervention). Among patients admitted after a fall (n=51 pre-intervention, n=42 post-intervention), documented VA assessment increased from 7.8% to 16.7% (p=0.21), and confrontational visual field testing increased from 5.9% to 19% (p=0.061) post-intervention. While these changes did not reach statistical significance, they demonstrate a positive trend following low-cost interventions. Conclusion Visual assessments remain underperformed in elderly inpatients following a fall despite national guidance. Targeted low-cost interventions, including staff education and improved access to assessment tools, can improve compliance. Continued multidisciplinary engagement, system-level changes, and regular audit cycles are necessary to embed vision assessment as a routine component of post-fall care and to reduce fall-related harm.

Indexed as

elderlyfallsquality improvementvisual assessmentvisual impairment

Identifiers

PMID41111684
PMCPMC12530695

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.