Citation

Sanders KM, Stuart AL, Scott D, Kotowicz MA, Nicholson GC. Int. J. Endocrinol. 2015; 2015: e210527.

Affiliation

Department of Medicine, NorthWest Academic Centre, Western Health and the University of Melbourne, Sunshine Hospital, 176 Furlong Road, St Albans, VIC 3021, Australia ; Rural Clinical School, The University of Queensland, 152 West Street, Toowoomba, QLD 4350, Australia.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2015, Hindawi Publishing)

DOI

10.1155/2015/210527

PMID

26273292

PMCID

PMC4530247

Abstract

OBJECTIVEs. To compare 12-month falls recall with falls reported prospectively on daily falls calendars in a clinical trial of women aged ≥70 years.

METHODS. 2,096 community-dwelling women at high risk of falls and/or fracture completed a daily falls calendar and standardised interviews when falls were recorded, for 12 months. Data were compared to a 12-month falls recall question that categorised falls status as "no falls," "a few times," "several," and "regular" falls.

RESULTS. 898 (43%) participants reported a fall on daily falls calendars of whom 692 (77%) recalled fall(s) at 12 months. Participants who did not recall a fall were older (median 79.3 years versus 77.8 years, P = 0.028). Smaller proportions of fallers who sustained an injury or accessed health care failed to recall a fall (all P < 0.04). Among participants who recalled "no fall," 85% reported zero falls on daily calendars. Few women selected falls categories of "several times" or "regular" (4.1% and 0.4%, resp.) and the sensitivity of these categories was low (30% to 33%). Simply categorising participants into fallers or nonfallers had 77% sensitivity and 94% specificity.

CONCLUSION. For studies where intensive ascertainment of falls is not feasible, 12-month falls recall questions with fewer responses may be an acceptable alternative.

Language: en