Hopewell Sally, Adedire Olubusola, Copsey Bethan J, Boniface Graham J, Sherrington Catherine, Clemson Lindy, Close Jacqueline Ct, Lamb Sarah E
Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences (NDORMS), University of Oxford, Botnar Research Centre, Windmill Road, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK, OX3 7LD.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jul 23;7(7):CD012221. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012221.pub2.
Falls and fall-related injuries are common, particularly in those aged over 65, with around one-third of older people living in the community falling at least once a year. Falls prevention interventions may comprise single component interventions (e.g. exercise), or involve combinations of two or more different types of intervention (e.g. exercise and medication review). Their delivery can broadly be divided into two main groups: 1) multifactorial interventions where component interventions differ based on individual assessment of risk; or 2) multiple component interventions where the same component interventions are provided to all people.
To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of multifactorial interventions and multiple component interventions for preventing falls in older people living in the community.
We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, trial registers and reference lists. Date of search: 12 June 2017.
Randomised controlled trials, individual or cluster, that evaluated the effects of multifactorial and multiple component interventions on falls in older people living in the community, compared with control (i.e. usual care (no change in usual activities) or attention control (social visits)) or exercise as a single intervention.
Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed risks of bias and extracted data. We calculated the rate ratio (RaR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for rate of falls. For dichotomous outcomes we used risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs. For continuous outcomes, we used the standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% CIs. We pooled data using the random-effects model. We used the GRADE approach to assess the quality of the evidence.
We included 62 trials involving 19,935 older people living in the community. The median trial size was 248 participants. Most trials included more women than men. The mean ages in trials ranged from 62 to 85 years (median 77 years). Most trials (43 trials) reported follow-up of 12 months or over. We assessed most trials at unclear or high risk of bias in one or more domains.Forty-four trials assessed multifactorial interventions and 18 assessed multiple component interventions. (I not reported if = 0%).Multifactorial interventions versus usual care or attention controlThis comparison was made in 43 trials. Commonly-applied or recommended interventions after assessment of each participant's risk profile were exercise, environment or assistive technologies, medication review and psychological interventions. Multifactorial interventions may reduce the rate of falls compared with control: rate ratio (RaR) 0.77, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.87; 19 trials; 5853 participants; I = 88%; low-quality evidence. Thus if 1000 people were followed over one year, the number of falls may be 1784 (95% CI 1553 to 2016) after multifactorial intervention versus 2317 after usual care or attention control. There was low-quality evidence of little or no difference in the risks of: falling (i.e. people sustaining one or more fall) (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.03; 29 trials; 9637 participants; I = 60%); recurrent falls (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.03; 12 trials; 3368 participants; I = 53%); fall-related hospital admission (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.07; 15 trials; 5227 participants); requiring medical attention (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.10; 8 trials; 3078 participants). There is low-quality evidence that multifactorial interventions may reduce the risk of fall-related fractures (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.01; 9 trials; 2850 participants) and may slightly improve health-related quality of life but not noticeably (SMD 0.19, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.35; 9 trials; 2373 participants; I = 70%). Of three trials reporting on adverse events, one found none, and two reported 12 participants with self-limiting musculoskeletal symptoms in total.Multifactorial interventions versus exerciseVery low-quality evidence from one small trial of 51 recently-discharged orthopaedic patients means that we are uncertain of the effects on rate of falls or risk of falling of multifactorial interventions versus exercise alone. Other fall-related outcomes were not assessed.Multiple component interventions versus usual care or attention controlThe 17 trials that make this comparison usually included exercise and another component, commonly education or home-hazard assessment. There is moderate-quality evidence that multiple interventions probably reduce the rate of falls (RaR 0.74, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.91; 6 trials; 1085 participants; I = 45%) and risk of falls (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.90; 11 trials; 1980 participants). There is low-quality evidence that multiple interventions may reduce the risk of recurrent falls, although a small increase cannot be ruled out (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.05; 4 trials; 662 participants). Very low-quality evidence means that we are uncertain of the effects of multiple component interventions on the risk of fall-related fractures (2 trials) or fall-related hospital admission (1 trial). There is low-quality evidence that multiple interventions may have little or no effect on the risk of requiring medical attention (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.35; 1 trial; 291 participants); conversely they may slightly improve health-related quality of life (SMD 0.77, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.39; 4 trials; 391 participants; I = 88%). Of seven trials reporting on adverse events, five found none, and six minor adverse events were reported in two.Multiple component interventions versus exerciseThis comparison was tested in five trials. There is low-quality evidence of little or no difference between the two interventions in rate of falls (1 trial) and risk of falling (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.10; 3 trials; 863 participants) and very low-quality evidence, meaning we are uncertain of the effects on hospital admission (1 trial). One trial reported two cases of minor joint pain. Other falls outcomes were not reported.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Multifactorial interventions may reduce the rate of falls compared with usual care or attention control. However, there may be little or no effect on other fall-related outcomes. Multiple component interventions, usually including exercise, may reduce the rate of falls and risk of falling compared with usual care or attention control.
跌倒及与跌倒相关的损伤很常见,尤其是在65岁以上人群中,约三分之一居住在社区的老年人每年至少跌倒一次。预防跌倒的干预措施可能包括单一成分干预(如运动),或涉及两种或更多不同类型干预的组合(如运动和药物审查)。其实施方式大致可分为两大类:1)多因素干预,其中成分干预根据个体风险评估而有所不同;或2)多成分干预,即向所有人提供相同的成分干预。
评估多因素干预和多成分干预对预防社区老年人跌倒的效果(益处和危害)。
我们检索了Cochrane骨、关节和肌肉创伤组专业注册库、Cochrane对照试验中央注册库、MEDLINE、Embase、护理及相关健康文献累积索引、试验注册库和参考文献列表。检索日期:2017年6月12日。
随机对照试验,个体或整群随机,评估多因素和多成分干预对社区老年人跌倒的影响,并与对照组(即常规护理(日常活动无变化)或注意力对照(社交访问))或作为单一干预的运动进行比较。
两位综述作者独立选择研究、评估偏倚风险并提取数据。我们计算了跌倒发生率的率比(RaR)及95%置信区间(CI)。对于二分结局,我们使用风险比(RR)及95%CI。对于连续结局,我们使用标准化均数差(SMD)及95%CI。我们使用随机效应模型合并数据。我们采用GRADE方法评估证据质量。
我们纳入了62项试验,涉及19935名居住在社区的老年人。试验的中位数规模为248名参与者。大多数试验纳入的女性多于男性。试验中的平均年龄范围为62至85岁(中位数为77岁)。大多数试验(43项试验)报告随访时间为12个月或更长。我们评估的大多数试验在一个或多个领域存在偏倚风险不明确或高风险的情况。44项试验评估了多因素干预,其中18项评估了多成分干预。(I²未报告,若I² = 0%)。
多因素干预与常规护理或注意力对照
43项试验进行了此比较。在评估每个参与者的风险概况后,常用或推荐的干预措施包括运动﹑环境或辅助技术﹑药物审查和心理干预。与对照组相比,多因素干预可能会降低跌倒发生率:率比(RaR)为0.77,95%CI为0.67至0.87;19项试验;5853名参与者;I² = 88%;低质量证据。因此,如果对1000人进行一年的随访,多因素干预后跌倒次数可能为1784次(95%CI为1553至2016次),而常规护理或注意力对照后为2317次。在以下风险方面,证据质量低,几乎没有差异或差异不大:跌倒(即发生一次或多次跌倒的人)(RR为0.96,95%CI为0.90至1.03;29项试验;9637名参与者;I² = 60%);反复跌倒(RR为0.87,95%CI为0.74至1.03;12项试验;3368名参与者;I² = 53%);与跌倒相关的住院(RR为1.00,95%CI为0.92至1.07;15项试验;5227名参与者);需要医疗护理(RR为0.91,95%CI为0.75至1.10;8项试验;3078名参与者)。有低质量证据表明,多因素干预可能会降低与跌倒相关骨折的风险(RR为0.73,95%CI为0.53至1.01;9项试验;2850名参与者),并可能略微改善与健康相关的生活质量,但不明显(SMD为0.19,95%CI为0.03至0.35;9项试验;2373名参与者;I² = 70%)。在报告不良事件的三项试验中,一项未发现不良事件,两项共报告了12名有自限性肌肉骨骼症状的参与者。
多因素干预与运动
一项针对51名近期出院的骨科患者的小型试验提供的极低质量证据表明,我们不确定多因素干预与单独运动相比对跌倒发生率或跌倒风险的影响。未评估其他与跌倒相关的结局。
多成分干预与常规护理或注意力对照
进行此比较的17项试验通常包括运动和另一个成分,通常是教育或家庭危险评估。有中等质量证据表明,多成分干预可能会降低跌倒发生率(RaR为0.74,95%CI为0.60至0.91;6项试验;1085名参与者;I² = \45%)和跌倒风险(RR为0.82,95%CI为0.74至0.90;11项试验;1980名参与者)。有低质量证据表明,多成分干预可能会降低反复跌倒的风险,尽管不能排除略有增加的可能性(RR为0.81,95%CI为0.63至1.05;4项试验;662名参与者)。极低质量证据意味着我们不确定多成分干预对与跌倒相关骨折风险(2项试验)或与跌倒相关住院风险(1项试验)的影响。有低质量证据表明,多成分干预对需要医疗护理的风险可能几乎没有影响或影响不大(RR为0.95,95%CI为0.67至1.35;1项试验;291名参与者);相反,它们可能会略微改善与健康相关的生活质量(SMD为0.77,95%CI为0.16至1.39;4项试验;391名参与者;I² = 88%)。在报告不良事件的七项试验中,五项未发现不良事件,两项共报告了六项轻微不良事件。
多成分干预与运动
五项试验进行了此比较。在跌倒发生率(1项试验)和跌倒风险(RR为0.93,95%CI为0.78至1.10;3项试验;863名参与者)方面,两项干预措施之间几乎没有差异或差异不大,证据质量低;在对住院的影响方面,证据质量极低,意味着我们不确定其效果(1项试验)。一项试验报告了两例轻微关节疼痛。未报告其他跌倒结局。
与常规护理或注意力对照相比,多因素干预可能会降低跌倒发生率。然而,对其他与跌倒相关的结局可能几乎没有影响或影响不大。多成分干预,通常包括运动,与常规护理或注意力对照相比,可能会降低跌倒发生率和跌倒风险。