[P-172]: Development of an environmental safety assessment tool for older persons: Field testing of the Cougar Home Safety Assessments versions 1 and 2

2005 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. S63-S64
Author(s):  
Grace S. Fisher ◽  
Kristen Coolbaugh
2006 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 181-196 ◽  
Author(s):  
Grace S. Fisher ◽  
Kristen Coolbaugh ◽  
Christin Rhodes

After reviewing the literature on environmental safety and existing home safety evaluation tools, the researchers developed the Cougar Home Safety Assessment Version 1.0 (Cougar 1.0). This assessment is a 56-item tool for identifying environmental safety hazards in the homes of older persons. The first purpose of this study was to develop and field test the Cougar 1.0 to determine its inter-rater reliability and validity. The second purpose was to identify specific environmental safety hazards in the residences of older persons during the field test. Three graduate occupational therapy students administered the Cougar 1.0 in the homes of 14 older persons within one county of northeastern Pennsylvania. The instrument was found to have a moderate level of inter-rater reliability, as Cohen’s Kappa for the ratings of the 3 raters was .506. Percent agreement between the three raters was 90 percent. The field test found that the most frequently unsafe aspects of the homes were: a lack of grab bars near toilets; no emergency numbers posted near phones; the presence of non-grip throw rugs; lack of fire extinguishers; and lack of step stools. Participating residents and occupational therapy home safety specialists provided positive feedback regarding the content validity of the Cougar 1.0. This research suggests that the use of this instrument by occupational therapists may prevent client injuries in the home.


2007 ◽  
Vol 54 (2) ◽  
pp. 124-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Grace S. Fisher ◽  
Alison Baker ◽  
Dana Koval ◽  
Christine Lishok ◽  
Emily Maisto

2008 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Grace S. Fisher ◽  
Erin Bradley ◽  
Diane Costulas ◽  
Laura L. Kintner ◽  
Jodi Kozlevcar ◽  
...  

The purpose of this study was to determine if recommendations made as a result of the administration of the Cougar Home Safety Assessment Version 4.0 (CHSA 4.0) were effective in causing older residents to make environmental safety modifications in their homes. Initial data were collected during the administration of the CHSA 4.0 in the homes of 40 older people in four northeastern states. After completing the initial assessments, the researchers provided the participants with recommendations for improving the environmental safety of their homes. Approximately one month later, each home was reassessed with the CHSA 4.0. Overall, improvement in environmental safety was demonstrated in the homes with the greatest increases being in fire safety, emergency phone number placement, and bathroom safety. A t-test demonstrated a significant gain in compliance (t = 7.8, p < .001) by comparing the difference between the mean initial and reassessment home safety scores. A very large effect size (Cohen’s d = 1.7) was also found, indicating a high magnitude of difference between initial and reassessment safety ratings. The assessment proved to be beneficial in increasing the environmental safety of homes.


Author(s):  
A. Zucchelli ◽  
R. Apuzzo ◽  
C. Paolillo ◽  
V. Prestipino ◽  
S. De Bianchi ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Delirium is frequent though undetected in older patients admitted to the Emergency Department (ED). Aims To develop and validate a delirium risk assessment tool for older persons admitted to the ED Observation Unit (OU). Methods We used data from two samples of 65 + year-old patients, one admitted to the ED of Brescia Hospital (n = 257) and one to the ED of Desio Hospital (n = 107), Italy. Data from Brescia were used as training sample, those collected in Desio as testing one. Delirium was assessed using the 4AT and patients’ characteristic were retrieved from medical charts. Variables found to be associated with delirium in the training sample were tested for the creation of a delirium risk assessment tool. The resulting tool’s performances were assessed in the testing subsample. Results Of all possible scores tested, the combination with the highest discriminative ability in the training sample included: age ≥ 75 years, dementia diagnosis, chronic use of neuroleptics, and hearing impairment. The delirium score exhibited an AUC of 0.874 and 0.893 in the training and testing samples, respectively. For a 1-point increase in the score, the odds of delirium increased more than twice in both samples. Discussion We propose a delirium risk assessing tool that includes variables that can be easily collected at ED admission and that can be calculated rapidly. Conclusion A risk assessment tool could help improving delirium detection in older persons referring to ED.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Young Ho Yun ◽  
Sinae Oh ◽  
Jin Ah Sim ◽  
Sujee Lee ◽  
Eun-Jung Sohn

Abstract Objectives We developed the Health-Friendly Activity Index (HFAI) to measure the health-friendly activity of corporations or organizations comprehensively. We validated the developed tool and reported on its use as an assessment tool to improve consumers’ health-related outcomes.Study Design This is a cross-sectional studyPUBH-D-20-02610 Development of the HFAI questionnaire followed a three-phase process: item generation, item construction, and validation with field testing. Using relevance and feasibility criteria, we developed a 105-item questionnaire with six domains (Governance and Infrastructure, Needs Assessment, Planning, Implementation, Monitoring and Feedback, and Outcomes). To assess the sensitivity and validity of the questionnaire, we recruited two different groups. We assessed Group One (31 companies) based on their recent sustainability reports and compared their HFAI scores with the Contribution Assessment Tool for Consumer’s Health (CATCH) scores from 400 people from the general Korean population. For Group Two, we recruited 19 worksites and asked them to complete the HFAI and CATCH.Results Each domain of HFAI exhibited a Cronbach’s α coefficient between 0.382 and 1.000 for Group One and a Cronbach’s α coefficient between 0.676 and 0.938 for Group Two.


2013 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 162-171 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. M. Chandra Kishen ◽  
Ananth Ramaswamy ◽  
C. S. Manohar

2008 ◽  
Vol 30 (8) ◽  
pp. 815-817 ◽  
Author(s):  
Renuka Tunuguntla ◽  
Osvaldo Rodriguez ◽  
Jorge G. Ruiz ◽  
Syeda S. Qadri ◽  
Michael J. Mintzer ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document