Poster Presentation

Friday, July 13, 2007
9:30 AM - 10:15 AM

Friday, July 13, 2007
3:15 PM - 4:00 PM
This presentation is part of : Poster Presentation III
Outcomes of Randomized Pilot Study: Fall Prevention Rooms
Huberta-Corazon Thiam Cozart, MS, RN, School of Nursing, Texas Woman's University, Houston, TX, USA, Pamela Willson, RN, PhD, FNP, BC, School of Nursing, Prairie View A & M University, Houston, TX, USA, and Nancy J. Petersen, PhD, Human Research & Development, Michael E. Debakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Learning Objective #1: 1. Describe Fall Prevention Rooms (FPR) prescribed for high-risk for fall patients as environmental primary prevention interventions congruent to the Neuman Systems Model (NSM).
Learning Objective #2: 2. Analyze the effectiveness of Fall Prevention Rooms related to the incidence of falls in the hospitalized elderly military veterans.

Aim: To determine the effectiveness of environmental primary prevention interventions, in the exemplars of Fall Prevention Rooms (FPR) among hospitalized high-risk for falls elderly military veterans. Background: Falls are the fifth leading causes of death and the second leading causes of mortality from injuries among the elderly. Hospitalized patient falls range from 4-12 per 1,000 bed days of care. Conceptual Framework: Neuman Systems Model served to direct this study that addressed the seventh assumption; “Primary prevention relates to general knowledge that is applied in client assessment and intervention, in identification and reduction or mitigation of possible or actual risk factors associated with environmental stressors to prevent possible reaction”. Method: Two-group prospective design, using block-randomized sample allocation with concealed assignment to FPR was used from September to December 2006. Sample consisted of 21 conveniently enrolled high-risk for falls elderly males with 14-day follow-up. Instruments: Morse Fall Scale screened high-risk for falls patients, with 72 % sensitivity, 51 % specificity, 51 % accuracy, 38 % positive predictive value, 81 % negative predictive value and 30 % prevalence. Equipment Checklist assessed fall prevention devices in the FPR. Results: Fisher’s Exact showed no difference (p 0.214) between fallers and non-fallers among the two groups. Of more clinical significance was the 33% (n = 3) of elderly fallers (mean age = 73; SD = 11.63) assigned to regular care with non-fallers assigned to FPR. Falls happened during late afternoons, while performing transfer, hygiene, and toileting activities and occurred on the 5th, 12th, and 14th day of follow-up visits. Conclusions: FPR may facilitate achievement of the goal of the Joint Commission of Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations, which is to “reduce the risk of patient harm resulting from falls” and achievement of Healthy People 2010 goal number 15, which is to “reduce death from falls”.