ABSTRACTFalls in residential long-term care (LTC) facilities continue to be a leading cause of injury for residents and cost for the health care system. Interdisciplinary clinical teams are responsible for assessing risk levels for their residents and developing appropriate care plans and interventions in response. This study compares the predictive accuracy of three separate fall risk assessment tools: the interRAI Falls Clinical Assessment Protocol (CAP), derived from the LTC Facility (LTCF) or Minimum Data Set (MDS) 2.0 assessments; the Scott Fall Risk Screen; and a modified Fall Risk Tool that was implemented as part of a provincial Fall Reduction Strategy in Nova Scotia. To conduct this retrospective cohort study, secondary data were collected from 1,553 LTC residents with interRAI assessments completed between March 1, 2015 and September 29, 2016, across Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. For each resident, data were collected regarding the three fall risk assessments, along with fall incident data for use in sensitivity, specificity, and logistic regression analyses. This study found that although all three tools had limitations with sensitivity or specificity thresholds, the interRAI Falls CAP delivered the highest accuracy with a c-statistic of 0.673, compared with the Scott Fall Risk Screen at 0.529 and the modified Fall Risk Tool at 0.609. When diseases that have been established to be a risk factor for falls were added to the model, the overall accuracy of the interRAI Falls CAP combined with those covariates increased to 0.749. These results suggest that the best practice guidelines for fall risk assessment be revisited, and that the interRAI Falls CAP could potentially be updated to include certain diseases and controls for optimal predictive ability.
Public reporting of performance measures in long-term care in Canada: does it make a difference?
