4.0 Article

Falls Among the Community-living Elderly People in Hong Kong: A Retrospective Study

Journal

HONG KONG JOURNAL OF OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY
Volume 21, Issue 1, Pages 33-40

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.hkjot.2011.05.005

Keywords

Accidental falls; Community-living elderly; Retrospective study

Categories

Funding

  1. Hong Kong Housing Society

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To examine the base rate of falls for a group of community-living elderly people in Hong Kong. Methods: This was a retrospective cross-sectional study of 554 elderly people aged 65 years or above living in various geographical regions of Hong Kong, who had completed assessments at a community centre over a period of 4 months. Participants were recruited by convenience sampling and stratified by age range according to the distribution in Hong Kong population. They were asked to report on their fall history for a period of the 12 months before joining the study. Results: Of all the participants, 111 reported having fallen during the preceding 12 months. The fall rate was 29%, and the 1-year prevalence of falls was 20%, dropping to 6.3% for two or more falls. Of all the falls, 47.7% occurred indoors whereas 52.3% occurred outdoors. Results showed female gender, Timed Up & Go Test, self-reported history of upper limb fracture, an intake of four or more types of medication, receiving rehabilitation services, and living with a couple only were independent predictors for falters with at least one fall. There were no significant differences between the number of near-miss experienced by falters and nonfallers in the past 12 months. Conclusion: We determined the base rate of falls for a group of community-living elderly people of Hong Kong. Retrospective methods, which ask elderly people living in a community to recall their falls, may be used to identify risks preceding falls and to facilitate early intervention. Copyright (C) 2011, Elsevier (Singapore) Pte. Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available