↓ Skip to main content

Exploring Risk Factors of Patient Falls: A Retrospective Hospital Record Study in Japan

Overview of attention for article published in Tohoku Journal of Experimental Medicine, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 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
Exploring Risk Factors of Patient Falls: A Retrospective Hospital Record Study in Japan
Published in
Tohoku Journal of Experimental Medicine, November 2017
DOI 10.1620/tjem.243.195
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mami Ishikuro, Sergio Ramón Gutiérrez Ubeda, Taku Obara, Toshihide Saga, Naofumi Tanaka, Chiyo Oikawa, Keisei Fujimori

Abstract

Patient falls are common adverse medical events in hospitals. The objectives of this study were to clarify the factors of patient falls at hospitalization or transfer to another ward, which could be assumed that patients experience new environment. Patients who were hospitalized or transferred to another ward at a hospital in Japan, between January 14 and February 14, 2014 were included. We used a risk assessment sheet and applied stepwise regression analysis to identify factors of patient falls. We also investigated changes in patient conditions on the risk assessment sheet by the chi-square test. A total of 1,362 patients (53.2% female; mean age, 57.1 ± 18.0 years) were eligible for analysis, and 38 (2.8%) fell during the study period. The fallers were significantly older than the non-fallers (63.8 ± 18.0 vs. 56.9 ± 18.7 years, P = 0.03), but no significant difference was seen in sex (55.3% vs. 53.1% female). "History of falls", "Tubes inserted", "Need assistance/supervision for toileting" and "Excretion more than two times per night" were significantly related to patient falls (adjusted odds ratios [95% confidence interval]: 2.41 [1.05-5.53], 3.64 [1.57-8.43], 4.52 [2.00-10.23] and 3.92 [1.38-11.09]). Among 30 fallers, "Overestimation or non-understanding of own physical abilities" was significantly more frequent after falls (30.0%) than before falls (6.7%, P = 0.02). The factors found in this study might be useful for identifying patients at higher risk of falls.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 24%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Researcher 3 7%
Student > Postgraduate 3 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 4%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 18 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 13 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 16%
Psychology 1 2%
Computer Science 1 2%
Social Sciences 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 21 47%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 01 December 2017.
All research outputs
#21,048,638
of 25,852,155 outputs
Outputs from Tohoku Journal of Experimental Medicine
#843
of 1,107 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#343,335
of 449,730 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Tohoku Journal of Experimental Medicine
#24
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,852,155 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,107 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 449,730 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.