4.6 Review

Predictability of Fall Risk Assessments in Community-Dwelling Older Adults: A Scoping Review

期刊

SENSORS
卷 23, 期 18, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/s23187686

关键词

fall risk assessment; aging population; community dwelling older adults; sensor

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Fall risk increases with age, and predicting fall risk using sensor data seems to outperform conventional tests. However, further large-scale prospective studies are needed to validate its effectiveness.
Fall risk increases with age, and one-third of adults over 65 years old experience a fall annually. Due to the aging population, the number of falls and related medical costs will progressively increase. Correct prediction of who will fall in the future is necessary to timely intervene in order to prevent falls. Therefore, the aim of this scoping review is to determine the predictive value of fall risk assessments in community-dwelling older adults using prospective studies. A total of 37 studies were included that evaluated clinical assessments (questionnaires, physical assessments, or a combination), sensor-based clinical assessments, or sensor- based daily life assessments using prospective study designs. The posttest probability of falling or not falling was calculated. In general, fallers were better classified than non-fallers. Questionnaires had a lower predictive capability compared to the other assessment types. Contrary to conclusions drawn in reviews that include retrospective studies, the predictive value of physical tests evaluated in prospective studies varies largely, with only smaller-sampled studies showing good predictive capabilities. Sensor-based fall risk assessments are promising and improve with task complexity, although they have only been evaluated in relatively small samples. In conclusion, fall risk prediction using sensor data seems to outperform conventional tests, but the method's validity needs to be confirmed by large prospective studies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据