Comparison of the Reliability and Validity of Fall Risk Assessment Tools in Patients with Acute Neurological Disorders

Sung Reul Kim, Sung Hee Yoo, Young Sun Shin, Ji Yoon Jeon, Jun Yoo Kim, Su Jung Kang, Hea Sook Choi, Hea Limy Lee, Young Hee An

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The aim of the study was to identify the most appropriate fall-risk assessment tool for neurological patients in an acute care setting. Methods: This descriptive study compared the reliability and validity of three fall-risk assessment tools (Morse Fall Scale, MFS; St Thomas's Risk Assessment Tool in Falling Elderly Inpatients, STRATIFY; Hendrich II Fall Risk Model, HFRM II). We assessed patients who were admitted to the Department of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Rehabilitation at Asan Medical Center between July 1 and October 31, 2011, using a constructive questionnaire including general and clinical characteristics, and each item from the three tools. We analyzed inter-rater reliability with the kappa value, and the sensitivity, specificity, predictive value, and the area under the curve (AUC) of the three tools. Results: The analysis included 1,026 patients, and 32 falls occurred during this study. Inter-rater reliability was above 80% in all three tools. and the sensitivity was 50.0% (MFS), 84.4%(STRATIFY), and 59.4%(HFRM II). The AUC of the STRATIFY was 82.8. However, when the cutoff point was regulated as not 50 but 40 points, the AUC of the MFS was higher at 83.7. Conclusion: These results suggest that the STRATIFY may be the best tool for predicting falls for acute neurological patients.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)24-32
Number of pages9
JournalKorean Journal of Adult Nursing
Volume25
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013 Jan 1
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Nervous System Diseases
Reproducibility of Results
Area Under Curve
Accidental Falls
Neurosurgery
Neurology
Inpatients
Rehabilitation
Sensitivity and Specificity

Keywords

  • Falls
  • Neurology
  • Reliability
  • Validity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Nursing(all)

Cite this

Comparison of the Reliability and Validity of Fall Risk Assessment Tools in Patients with Acute Neurological Disorders. / Kim, Sung Reul; Yoo, Sung Hee; Shin, Young Sun; Jeon, Ji Yoon; Kim, Jun Yoo; Kang, Su Jung; Choi, Hea Sook; Lee, Hea Limy; An, Young Hee.

In: Korean Journal of Adult Nursing, Vol. 25, No. 1, 01.01.2013, p. 24-32.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Kim, Sung Reul ; Yoo, Sung Hee ; Shin, Young Sun ; Jeon, Ji Yoon ; Kim, Jun Yoo ; Kang, Su Jung ; Choi, Hea Sook ; Lee, Hea Limy ; An, Young Hee. / Comparison of the Reliability and Validity of Fall Risk Assessment Tools in Patients with Acute Neurological Disorders. In: Korean Journal of Adult Nursing. 2013 ; Vol. 25, No. 1. pp. 24-32.
@article{54280c0afc1c420897bad530d999cc70,
title = "Comparison of the Reliability and Validity of Fall Risk Assessment Tools in Patients with Acute Neurological Disorders",
abstract = "The aim of the study was to identify the most appropriate fall-risk assessment tool for neurological patients in an acute care setting. Methods: This descriptive study compared the reliability and validity of three fall-risk assessment tools (Morse Fall Scale, MFS; St Thomas's Risk Assessment Tool in Falling Elderly Inpatients, STRATIFY; Hendrich II Fall Risk Model, HFRM II). We assessed patients who were admitted to the Department of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Rehabilitation at Asan Medical Center between July 1 and October 31, 2011, using a constructive questionnaire including general and clinical characteristics, and each item from the three tools. We analyzed inter-rater reliability with the kappa value, and the sensitivity, specificity, predictive value, and the area under the curve (AUC) of the three tools. Results: The analysis included 1,026 patients, and 32 falls occurred during this study. Inter-rater reliability was above 80{\%} in all three tools. and the sensitivity was 50.0{\%} (MFS), 84.4{\%}(STRATIFY), and 59.4{\%}(HFRM II). The AUC of the STRATIFY was 82.8. However, when the cutoff point was regulated as not 50 but 40 points, the AUC of the MFS was higher at 83.7. Conclusion: These results suggest that the STRATIFY may be the best tool for predicting falls for acute neurological patients.",
keywords = "Falls, Neurology, Reliability, Validity",
author = "Kim, {Sung Reul} and Yoo, {Sung Hee} and Shin, {Young Sun} and Jeon, {Ji Yoon} and Kim, {Jun Yoo} and Kang, {Su Jung} and Choi, {Hea Sook} and Lee, {Hea Limy} and An, {Young Hee}",
year = "2013",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.7475/kjan.2013.25.1.24",
language = "English",
volume = "25",
pages = "24--32",
journal = "Korean Journal of Adult Nursing",
issn = "1225-4886",
publisher = "Korean Association of Medical Journal Edirors",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of the Reliability and Validity of Fall Risk Assessment Tools in Patients with Acute Neurological Disorders

AU - Kim, Sung Reul

AU - Yoo, Sung Hee

AU - Shin, Young Sun

AU - Jeon, Ji Yoon

AU - Kim, Jun Yoo

AU - Kang, Su Jung

AU - Choi, Hea Sook

AU - Lee, Hea Limy

AU - An, Young Hee

PY - 2013/1/1

Y1 - 2013/1/1

N2 - The aim of the study was to identify the most appropriate fall-risk assessment tool for neurological patients in an acute care setting. Methods: This descriptive study compared the reliability and validity of three fall-risk assessment tools (Morse Fall Scale, MFS; St Thomas's Risk Assessment Tool in Falling Elderly Inpatients, STRATIFY; Hendrich II Fall Risk Model, HFRM II). We assessed patients who were admitted to the Department of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Rehabilitation at Asan Medical Center between July 1 and October 31, 2011, using a constructive questionnaire including general and clinical characteristics, and each item from the three tools. We analyzed inter-rater reliability with the kappa value, and the sensitivity, specificity, predictive value, and the area under the curve (AUC) of the three tools. Results: The analysis included 1,026 patients, and 32 falls occurred during this study. Inter-rater reliability was above 80% in all three tools. and the sensitivity was 50.0% (MFS), 84.4%(STRATIFY), and 59.4%(HFRM II). The AUC of the STRATIFY was 82.8. However, when the cutoff point was regulated as not 50 but 40 points, the AUC of the MFS was higher at 83.7. Conclusion: These results suggest that the STRATIFY may be the best tool for predicting falls for acute neurological patients.

AB - The aim of the study was to identify the most appropriate fall-risk assessment tool for neurological patients in an acute care setting. Methods: This descriptive study compared the reliability and validity of three fall-risk assessment tools (Morse Fall Scale, MFS; St Thomas's Risk Assessment Tool in Falling Elderly Inpatients, STRATIFY; Hendrich II Fall Risk Model, HFRM II). We assessed patients who were admitted to the Department of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Rehabilitation at Asan Medical Center between July 1 and October 31, 2011, using a constructive questionnaire including general and clinical characteristics, and each item from the three tools. We analyzed inter-rater reliability with the kappa value, and the sensitivity, specificity, predictive value, and the area under the curve (AUC) of the three tools. Results: The analysis included 1,026 patients, and 32 falls occurred during this study. Inter-rater reliability was above 80% in all three tools. and the sensitivity was 50.0% (MFS), 84.4%(STRATIFY), and 59.4%(HFRM II). The AUC of the STRATIFY was 82.8. However, when the cutoff point was regulated as not 50 but 40 points, the AUC of the MFS was higher at 83.7. Conclusion: These results suggest that the STRATIFY may be the best tool for predicting falls for acute neurological patients.

KW - Falls

KW - Neurology

KW - Reliability

KW - Validity

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84877144183&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84877144183&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.7475/kjan.2013.25.1.24

DO - 10.7475/kjan.2013.25.1.24

M3 - Article

VL - 25

SP - 24

EP - 32

JO - Korean Journal of Adult Nursing

JF - Korean Journal of Adult Nursing

SN - 1225-4886

IS - 1

ER -