The STRATIFY tool and clinical judgment were poor predictors of falling in an acute hospital setting
Webster, Joan, Courtney, Mary D., Marsh, Nicole, Gale, Catherine, Abbott, Belynda, Mackenzie-Ross, Anita, & McRae, Prue (2009) The STRATIFY tool and clinical judgment were poor predictors of falling in an acute hospital setting. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63(1), pp. 109-113.
|Published Version (PDF 107kB) |
Administrators only | Request a copy from author
Objective: To compare the effectiveness of the STRATIFY falls tool with nurses’ clinical judgments in predicting patient falls.
Study Design and Setting: A prospective cohort study was conducted among the inpatients of an acute tertiary hospital. Participants were patients over 65 years of age admitted to any hospital unit. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) and negative
predictive values (NPV) of the instrument and nurses’ clinical judgments in predicting falls were calculated.
Results: Seven hundred and eighty-eight patients were screened and followed up during the study period. The fall prevalence was 9.2%. Of the 335 patients classified as being ‘‘at risk’’ for falling using the STRATIFY tool, 59 (17.6%) did sustain a fall (sensitivity50.82,
specificity50.61, PPV50.18, NPV50.97). Nurses judged that 501 patients were at risk of falling and, of these, 60 (12.0%) fell (sensitivity50.84, specificity50.38, PPV50.12, NPV50.96). The STRATIFY tool correctly identified significantly more patients as either fallers or nonfallers than the nurses (P50.027).
Conclusion: Considering the poor specificity and high rates of false-positive results for both the STRATIFY tool and nurses’ clinical judgments, we conclude that neither of these approaches are useful for screening of falls in acute hospital settings.
Citation countsare sourced monthly fromand citation databases.
These databases contain citations from different subsets of available publications and different time periods and thus the citation count from each is usually different. Some works are not in either database and no count is displayed. Scopus includes citations from articles published in 1996 onwards, and Web of Science® generally from 1980 onwards.
Citations counts from theindexing service can be viewed at the linked Google Scholar™ search.
|Item Type:||Journal Article|
|Keywords:||Accidental falls, Sensitivity and specificity, Positive and negative predictive values, Aged; Hospitals, Clinical judgement, Screening tools|
|Subjects:||Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > MEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES (110000) > NURSING (111000) > Clinical Nursing - Secondary (Acute Care) (111003)|
Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > MEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES (110000) > NURSING (111000)
|Divisions:||Current > Research Centres > Centre for Health Research|
Current > QUT Faculties and Divisions > Faculty of Health
Current > Institutes > Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation
Current > Schools > School of Nursing
|Copyright Owner:||Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.|
|Deposited On:||03 Jul 2009 13:01|
|Last Modified:||29 Feb 2012 23:59|
Repository Staff Only: item control page