↓ Skip to main content

Effectiveness of interventions aimed at improving physical and psychological outcomes of fall-related injuries in people with dementia: a narrative systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
191 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Effectiveness of interventions aimed at improving physical and psychological outcomes of fall-related injuries in people with dementia: a narrative systematic review
Published in
Systematic Reviews, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13643-018-0697-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shannon Robalino, Sarange B. Nyakang’o, Fiona R. Beyer, Chris Fox, Louise M. Allan

Abstract

The annual prevalence of falls in people with dementia ranges from 47 to 90%. Falls are a common reason for hospital admission in people with dementia, and there is limited research evidence regarding the care pathways experienced by this population. In addition to immediate management of an injury, prevention of further falls is likely to be an important part of any successful intervention. This review aims to assess the effectiveness of interventions for improving the physical and psychological wellbeing of people with dementia who have sustained a fall-related injury. Systematic review methodologies were employed utilising searches across multiple databases (MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Health Management Information Consortium, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, and Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro)) and citation chaining. Studies including people with a known diagnosis of dementia living in the community and who present at health services with a fall, with or without injury, were included. Outcomes of interest included mobility, recurrent falls, activities of daily living, length of hospital stay, and post-discharge residence. Results were independently reviewed and quality assessed by two researchers, and data extracted using a customised form. A narrative synthesis was performed due to heterogeneity of the included studies. Seven studies were included. Interventions clustered into three broad categories: multidisciplinary in-hospital post-surgical geriatric assessment; pharmaceuticals; and multifactorial assessment. Multidisciplinary care and early mobilisation showed short-term improvements for some outcomes. Only an annual administration of zoledronic acid showed long-term reduction in recurrent falls. Due to high heterogeneity across the studies, definitive conclusions could not be reached. Most post-fall interventions were not aimed at patients with dementia and have shown little efficacy regardless of cognitive status. Minor improvements to some quality of life indicators were shown, but these were generally not statistically significant. Conclusions were also limited due to most studies addressing hip fracture; the interventions provided for this type of injury may not be suitable for other types of fractures or soft tissue injuries, or for use in primary care. PROSPERO CRD42016029565 .

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 191 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 191 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 28 15%
Researcher 19 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 9%
Student > Bachelor 17 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 6%
Other 32 17%
Unknown 67 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 39 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 27 14%
Psychology 16 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 3%
Sports and Recreations 5 3%
Other 21 11%
Unknown 77 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 March 2018.
All research outputs
#2,786,770
of 24,162,141 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#491
of 2,100 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,545
of 334,713 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#18
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,162,141 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,100 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 334,713 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.