Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background: Hospital emergency departments (EDs) treat a high proportion of older people, many as a direct consequence of falling.
Objective: To develop and externally validate a fall risk screening tool for use in hospital EDs and to compare the tool's predictive ability to existing screening tools.
Methods: This prospective cohort study involved two hospital EDs in Sydney, Australia. Potential participants were people aged 70+ years who presented to the ED after falling or with a history of 2+ falls in the previous year and were subsequently discharged. 219 people participated in the tool development study and 178 people participated in the external validation study. Study measures included number of fallers during the 6-month follow-up period, and physical status, medical history, fall history and community service use.
Results: 31% and 35% of participants fell in the development and external validation samples, respectively. The developed two-item screening tool included: 2+ falls in the past year (OR 4.18, 95% CI 2.61 to 6.68) and taking 6+ medications (OR 1.89, CI 1.18 to 3.04). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.70 (0.64-0.76). This represents significantly better predictive ability than the measure of 2+ previous falls alone (AUC 0.67, 0.62-0.72, p=0.02) and similar predictive ability to the FROP-Com (AUC 0.73, 0.67-0.79, p=0.25) and PROFET screens (AUC 0.70, 0.62-0.78, p=0.5).
Conclusions: A simple, two-item screening tool demonstrated good external validity and accurately discriminated between fallers and non-fallers. This tool could identify high risk individuals who may benefit from onward referral or intervention after ED discharge.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/emermed-2012-201783 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!