Skip to main content

Table 3 Adherence to the Prevention of Falls Network Europe (ProFaNE) recommendations

From: Appraising the uptake and use of recommendations for a common outcome data set for clinical trials: a case study in fall injury prevention

Recommendation 1: Domains and considerations (n = 34) Yes – n (%)
1.1 Inclusion of domains
Domains reported on:
 Falls 32 (94)
 Fall injury 16 (47)
 Psychological consequences 7 (21)
 Health-related quality of life 8 (24)
 Physical activity 8 (24)
Recommendation 2; Falls (n = 32) Yes – n (%)
2.1 Recommended definition
 Defined a fall as ‘an unexpected event in which the participants come to rest on the ground, floor or lower level’ 24 (75)
2.2 Lay perspective
 Considered lay perspective during ascertainment of information 5 (16)
 Asked participants: ‘In the past month, have you had any fall including a slip or trip in which you lost your balance and landed on the floor or ground or lower level?’ 0 (0)
2.3 Methods and systems for recording falls information
 Used daily prospective recording 26 (81)
 Used a notification system with a minimum of monthly reporting 19 (59)
 Used a telephone or face-to-face interview to rectify missing data and ascertain further details of falls 19 (59)
2.4 Summarising of fall data
 Reported number of falls 25 (78)
 Reported number of fallers 26 (81)
 Reported number of non-fallers 26 (81)
 Reported number of frequent fallers 16 (50)
 Reported fall rate per person year 16 (50)
 Reported time to first fall 8 (25)
2.5 Covariate adjustment and further data summaries
 Did not adjust for physical activity in primary analysis 32 (100)
 Reported absolute risk difference between groups 1 (3)
Recommendation 3: Injuries (n = 16) Yes – n (%)
3.1 Recommended measure
  Reported number of radiologically confirmed peripheral fracture events per person year 0 (0)
3.2 Classification of injuries  
  Used the International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision, classification system to classify injuries 0 (0)
3.3 Methods and systems for recording injury information
  Used daily prospective recording 11 (69)
  Used a notification system with a minimum of monthly reporting 10 (63)
  Used a telephone or face-to-face intervention to rectify missing data and ascertain further details of injuries 11 (69)
3.4 Summarising of injury data
  Reported peripheral fracture rate per person year of follow-up 0 (0)
  Reported number of peripheral fractures 0 (0)
  Reported number of people sustaining peripheral fractures 0 (0)
  Reported number of people sustaining multiple peripheral fractures 0 (0)
3.5 Covariate adjustment and further data summaries
  Did not adjust for physical activity in primary analysis 16 (100)
  Reported absolute risk difference between groups 0 (0)
Recommendation 4: Psychological consequences of falling (n = 7) Yes – n (%)
4.1 Recommended measure
  Used the recommended modified Falls Efficacy Scale (mFES) 1 (14)
4.2 Scoring of measure
  Scored mFES as per published guidance 1 (14)
Recommendation 5: Health-related quality of life (n = 8) Yes – n (%)
5.1 Recommended measure
  Used a recommended measure of health-related quality of life 4 (50)
  Measured health-related quality of life using:
  Short Form 12 (SF-12) 1 (13)
  European Quality of Life Instrument (EQ-5D) 3 (38)
Recommendation 6: Physical activity (n = 8) Yes – n (%)
6.1 Outcome measure
  Used any measure of physical activity 8 (100)
Recommendation 7; Time points for follow-up Yes – n (%)
7.1 Length of follow-up assessment
  Reported at follow-up of ≥12 months in domain of:
  Falls 24 (75)
  Injuries 15 (94)
  Psychological consequences of falling 3 (43)
  Health-related quality of life 3 (38)
  Physical activity 6 (75)
  1. The recommendations were most frequently cited in the methods section of articles (n = 24), but were also cited in the introduction or background (n = 4) and discussion (n = 9)