A systematic review and meta-analysis of the measurement properties of concerns-about-falling instruments in older people and people at increased risk of falls.

Autor:	McGarrigle L; School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK.; Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M13 9NQ, UK., Yang Y; School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK.; Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M13 9NQ, UK.; NIHR Applied Research Collaboration Greater Manchester, The University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK., Lasrado R; School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK.; Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M13 9NQ, UK.; NIHR Applied Research Collaboration Greater Manchester, The University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK., Gittins M; School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK.; Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M13 9NQ, UK.; Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester M13 9WL, UK., Todd C; School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK.; Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M13 9NQ, UK.; NIHR Applied Research Collaboration Greater Manchester, The University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK.; Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester M13 9WL, UK.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Age and ageing [Age Ageing] 2023 May 01; Vol. 52 (5).
DOI:	10.1093/ageing/afad055
Abstrakt:	Background: The 16-item Falls Efficacy Scale International (FES-I) is widely used to assess concerns-about-falling. Variants include 7-item Short FES-I, 30-item Iconographical Falls Efficacy Scale (Icon FES) and 10-item short Icon FES. No comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis has been conducted to synthesise evidence regarding the measurement properties of these tools. Objectives: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the measurement properties of four FES-I variants. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Plus, PsycINFO and Web of Science were searched systematically and articles were assessed for eligibility independently. The methodological quality of eligible studies was assessed using COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) Risk of Bias checklist. The quality of measurement properties was assessed using COSMIN criteria for good measurement properties. Where possible, meta-analysis was conducted; otherwise, narrative synthesis was performed. Overall certainty of evidence was rated using a modified Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system approach. Results: The review included 58 studies investigating measurement properties of the four instruments. There was high-quality evidence to support internal consistency, reliability and construct validity of all instruments. Moderate- to high-certainty evidence suggests one-factor structure of FES-I with two underlying dimensions, one-factor structure of Short FES-I and two-factor structure of Icon FES. There was high-certainty evidence to support the responsiveness of FES-I, with further research needed for the other instruments. Conclusion: There is evidence for excellent measurement properties of all four instruments. We recommend the use of these tools with healthy older people and people at a greater risk of falls due to conditions that might affect mobility and balance. (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Geriatrics Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu