Table 1. Overview of included studies showing studies characteristics and summary of findings.
| Ref. | Sampling | n* | Mean Age | %♀ | Fall data source | #falls | Fallers (%) | Reported findings |
| Cooker 2003 | Patients admitted to a Geriatric Assessment and Rehabilitation Unit. Mean length of patient stay was 50 days. | 432 | 81 | 69 | Patient incident report | 13.4 falls/1000 patient days | – | STRATIFY (cut-off score ≥1) |
| sensitivity: 95% (95%CI 90–99) | ||||||||
| specificity: 17% (95%CI 13–21) | ||||||||
| positive predictive value: 28% (95%CI 24–33) | ||||||||
| negative predictive value: 90% (95%CI 83–98) | ||||||||
| STRATIFY (cut-off score ≥2) | ||||||||
| sensitivity: 66% (95%CI 57–75) | ||||||||
| specificity: 47% (95%CI 41–52) | ||||||||
| positive predictive value: 30% (95%CI 24–36) | ||||||||
| negative predictive value: 80% (95%CI 74–85) | ||||||||
| STRATIFY (cut-off score ≥3) | ||||||||
| sensitivity: 36% (95%CI 27–45) | ||||||||
| specificity: 85% (95%CI 81–89) | ||||||||
| positive predictive value: 45% (95%CI 35–55) | ||||||||
| negative predictive value: 79% (95%CI 75–84) | ||||||||
| STRATIFY (cut-off score ≥4) | ||||||||
| sensitivity: 11% (95%CI 5–17) | ||||||||
| specificity: 96% (95%CI 94–98) | ||||||||
| positive predictive value: 50% (95%CI 30–70) | ||||||||
| negative predictive value: 76% (95%CI 72–80) | ||||||||
| STRATIFY (cut-off score = 5) | ||||||||
| sensitivity: 9% (95%CI −0.9–3) | ||||||||
| specificity: 100% (95%CI 99–100) | ||||||||
| positive predictive value: 50% (95%CI –19–119) | ||||||||
| negative predictive value: 74% (95%CI 70–79) | ||||||||
| Haines 2006 | Patients consecutively admitted at a hospital. metropolitan rehabilitation and aged care Rate of falls per 1000 patient-days was reported but exact length of follow-up is unclear. | 122 | 79 | 69 | Patient incident report | 14.7 falls/1000 patient days | 26 | STRATIFY (cut-off score ≥1) |
| sensitivity: 96% (95%CI 86–100) | ||||||||
| specificity: 20% (95%CI 12–29) | ||||||||
| STRATIFY (cut-off score ≥2) | ||||||||
| sensitivity: 77% (95%CI 59–92) | ||||||||
| specificity: 51% (95%CI 41–61) | ||||||||
| STRATIFY (cut-off score ≥3) | ||||||||
| sensitivity: 42% (95%CI 24–63) | ||||||||
| specificity: 78% (95%CI 70–86) | ||||||||
| STRATIFY (cut-off score ≥4) | ||||||||
| sensitivity: 4% (95%CI 0–14) | ||||||||
| specificity: 93% (95%CI 88–98) | ||||||||
| PJC-FRAT (Falls risk alert card) | ||||||||
| sensitivity: 73% (95%CI 55–90) | ||||||||
| specificity: 75% (95%CI 66–83) | ||||||||
| PJC-FRAT (Exercise program) | ||||||||
| sensitivity: 12% (95%CI 3–27) | ||||||||
| specificity: 84% (95%CI 77–91) | ||||||||
| PJC-FRAT (Education program) | ||||||||
| sensitivity: 27% (95%CI 12–46) | ||||||||
| specificity: 68% (95%CI 58–77) | ||||||||
| PJC-FRAT (Hip protectors) | ||||||||
| sensitivity: 31% (95%CI 14–48) | ||||||||
| specificity: 90% (95%CI 83–95) | ||||||||
| Vassallo 2008 | Consecutive patients from rehabilitation ward of a rehabilitation hospital admitting elderly patients. Length of follow-up unclear. | 200 | 81 | 62 | Falls diary compiled by nurses | – | 51 (length of follow-up unclear) | STRATIFY (cut-off score ≥2) |
| sensitivity: 82% (95%CI 69–90) | ||||||||
| specificity: 34% (95%CI 27–42) | ||||||||
| positive predictive value: 30% (95%CI 23–38) | ||||||||
| negative predictive value: 85% (95%CI 73–91) | ||||||||
| DOWNTON (score ≥3) | ||||||||
| sensitivity: 92% (95%CI 82–97) | ||||||||
| specificity: 36% (95%CI 28–43) | ||||||||
| positive predictive value: 33% (95%CI 25–41) | ||||||||
| negative predictive value: 93% (95%CI 83–97) | ||||||||
| Clinical judgment (observation of wandering behavior) | ||||||||
| sensitivity: 43% (95%CI 30–56) | ||||||||
| specificity: 91% (95%CI 84–94) | ||||||||
| positive predictive value: 61% (95%CI 44–75) | ||||||||
| negative predictive value: 82% (95%CI 75–87) |
*
Number of patients;
♀
Number of females.