ArticleBMJ open2025
Implementing recommended falls prevention practices for older patients in hospitals in England: a realist evaluation.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. 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.
- From information to action- a phase-based analysis of patient engagement in inpatient fall prevention: A scoping review.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo explore why there is variation in implementation of multifactorial falls prevention practices that are recommended to reduce falls risks for older patients in hospital.
designMixed method, realist evaluation.
settingThree older persons and three orthopaedic wards in acute hospitals in England.
participantsHealthcare professionals, including nurses, therapists and doctors (n=40), and patients aged 65 and over, and carers (n=31).
interventionWe examined mechanisms hypothesised to underpin the implementation of multifactorial falls risk assessment and multidomain, personalised prevention plans. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: We developed an explanation detailing that how contextual factors supported or constrained implementation of recommended falls prevention practices.
resultsNurses led delivery of falls risk assessment and prevention planning using their organisation's electronic health records (EHR) to guide and document these practices. Implementation of recommended practices was influenced by (1) organisational EHR systems that differed in falls risk assessment items they included, (2) competing priorities on nurse time that could reduce falls risk assessment to a tick box exercise, encourage 'blanket' rather than tailored interventions and that constrained nurse time with patients to personalise prevention plans and (3) established but not recommended falls prevention practices, such as risk screening, that focused multidisciplinary communication on patients screened as at high risk of falls and that emphasised nursing, rather than Multidisciplinary Team (MDT), responsibility for preventing falls through constant patient supervision.
conclusionsTo promote consistent delivery of multifactorial falls prevention practices, and to help ease the nursing burden, organisations should consider how electronic systems and established ward-based practices can be reconfigured to support greater multidisciplinary staff and patient and carer involvement in modification of individual falls risks.
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.