European geriatric medicine · 2025
Evaluating a user-centered design driven multifactorial falls risk assessment tool in primary care: a randomized effectiveness-implementation study.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Groos Sara S, Kuiper Judith I, van Schoor Natasja M, van Weert Julia C M, Linn Annemiek J, van der Velde Nathalie
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Multifactorial falls risk assessment tools (FRATs) help identify and target individual falls risk factors in older adults, but barriers can limit their effectiveness. This study evaluated a User-Centered Design (UCD) developed digital multifactorial FRAT, the Fall Analysis 2.0 in Dutch primary care.
METHODS: A randomized effectiveness-implementation study included 19 health care professionals (HCPs) from 15 primary care practices, randomly assigned to either the intervention or usual care group (control). The intervention involved using the Fall Analysis 2.0 and corresponding training. Participants were community-dwelling (65 +) at high risk of falling (36 intervention vs 27 control; mean age 81 years; 63.5% female). Primary outcomes included HCPs falls risk management behavior and older adults' adherence-related motivation to falls prevention advice, analyzed using Fisher's Exact tests and Mann Whitney U tests. Secondary outcomes of the Fall Analysis 2.0 user experience was explored through HCP interviews.
RESULTS: Fully completed multifactorial falls risk assessments (86.1%; n = 31) were significantly higher in the intervention than control group (3.7%, n = 1), p < .001. Use of validated tools was lower in the control group (11.1%; n = 3), p < .001. HCPs rated the Fall Analysis 2.0 highly for user experience. Successful implementation is dependent on improved reimbursement and interoperability with electronic health records. No significant differences in older adults' adherence-related motivation were found due to a ceiling effect.
CONCLUSION: UCD developed digital multifactorial FRATs like the Fall Analysis 2.0 show promise for improving falls prevention care quality. Future research should disentangle the effects of UCD from digitalization.
METHODS: A randomized effectiveness-implementation study included 19 health care professionals (HCPs) from 15 primary care practices, randomly assigned to either the intervention or usual care group (control). The intervention involved using the Fall Analysis 2.0 and corresponding training. Participants were community-dwelling (65 +) at high risk of falling (36 intervention vs 27 control; mean age 81 years; 63.5% female). Primary outcomes included HCPs falls risk management behavior and older adults' adherence-related motivation to falls prevention advice, analyzed using Fisher's Exact tests and Mann Whitney U tests. Secondary outcomes of the Fall Analysis 2.0 user experience was explored through HCP interviews.
RESULTS: Fully completed multifactorial falls risk assessments (86.1%; n = 31) were significantly higher in the intervention than control group (3.7%, n = 1), p < .001. Use of validated tools was lower in the control group (11.1%; n = 3), p < .001. HCPs rated the Fall Analysis 2.0 highly for user experience. Successful implementation is dependent on improved reimbursement and interoperability with electronic health records. No significant differences in older adults' adherence-related motivation were found due to a ceiling effect.
CONCLUSION: UCD developed digital multifactorial FRATs like the Fall Analysis 2.0 show promise for improving falls prevention care quality. Future research should disentangle the effects of UCD from digitalization.