Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42774894›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of nursing studies advances2026

From information to action- a phase-based analysis of patient engagement in inpatient fall prevention: A scoping review.

Sayaka Nishihara, Masae Satoh, Yuriko Iijima, Mika Katoh, Hiromi Shimmura, Rika Kawahara, Natsuko Shimazawa

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of nursing studies advances, 2026. 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

7 authors.

Sayaka NishiharaDepartment of Nursing, Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama City University, 3-9 Fukuura, Kanazawa-ku, Yokohama, 236-0004, Japan.
Masae SatohDepartment of Nursing, Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama City University, 3-9 Fukuura, Kanazawa-ku, Yokohama, 236-0004, Japan.
Yuriko IijimaDepartment of Nursing, Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama City University, 3-9 Fukuura, Kanazawa-ku, Yokohama, 236-0004, Japan.
Mika KatohDepartment of Nursing, Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama City University, 3-9 Fukuura, Kanazawa-ku, Yokohama, 236-0004, Japan.
Hiromi ShimmuraDepartment of Nursing, Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama City University, 3-9 Fukuura, Kanazawa-ku, Yokohama, 236-0004, Japan.
Rika KawaharaDepartment of Nursing, Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama City University, 3-9 Fukuura, Kanazawa-ku, Yokohama, 236-0004, Japan.
Natsuko ShimazawaDepartment of Nursing, Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama City University, 3-9 Fukuura, Kanazawa-ku, Yokohama, 236-0004, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Inpatient falls are a major patient safety concern worldwide. Although patient engagement has been increasingly emphasised in fall prevention, its distribution and depth across the prevention process remain poorly understood. Objective: This scoping review examined how patient engagement is structured across the phases of inpatient fall prevention worldwide, focusing on decisional ownership and the contextual and structural factors influencing its implementation. Design: A scoping review was conducted in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, and CINAHL were searched for English-language studies published between January 2015 and July 2026. The final search was conducted on 16 July 2026. Patient engagement was conceptualised as decisional ownership and classified into Level 1 (passive engagement), Level 2 (shared decision-making), and Level 3 (autonomous decision-making). The inpatient fall prevention process was organised into four phases: risk awareness, co-planning, goal setting, and self-management. Data were synthesised descriptively, incorporating cognitive requirements, family involvement, and information-sharing approaches. Results: Patient engagement varied across the four phases of inpatient fall prevention and was unevenly distributed throughout the prevention process. Engagement was concentrated in the risk awareness and co-planning phases, where Level 2 (shared decision-making) was occasionally achieved. In contrast, goal setting was often implicit or absent, and patient involvement in self-management remained limited. The extent of engagement was influenced by patients' cognitive capacity, with family involvement serving as a proxy in some interventions, although this role was inconsistently translated into active participation or behavioural change. Conclusion: Patient engagement in inpatient fall prevention does not extend uniformly across the care process. Current interventions primarily support shared decision-making but rarely facilitate autonomous patient involvement. Future interventions should incorporate explicit goal setting, strengthen self-management, integrate proxy engagement for patients with cognitive impairment, and align information sharing with decision-making support. This review reconceptualises patient engagement as a phase-dependent, structurally mediated process and identifies important gaps in the design of current interventions.

Indexed as

Accidental fallsActivationEmpowermentEngagementFall preventionInvolvementPatient participation

Identifiers

PMID42774894
PMCPMC13594758

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.