Development and preliminary examination of the predictive validity of the Falls Risk Assessment Tool (FRAT) for use in primary care

• Published in: Journal of public health (Oxford, England) England), 2004-06, Vol.26 (2), p.138-143
• Main Authors: Nandy, Sudip, Parsons, Suzanne, Cryer, Colin, Underwood, Martin, Rashbrook, Elaine, Carter, Yvonne, Eldridge, Sandra, Close, Jacqueline, Skelton, Dawn, Taylor, Stephanie, Feder, Gene
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Accident Prevention - methods; Accidental Falls - prevention & control; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Cohort Studies; Elderly people; Falls; Falls Risk Assessment Tool; Female; Geriatric Assessment - methods; Humans; Interdisciplinary Communication; Logistic Models; Male; older people; Pilot Projects; Primary health care; Primary Health Care - methods; Risk assessment; Risk Assessment - methods; Risk Factors; Surveys and Questionnaires; United Kingdom
• ISSN: 1741-3842; 1741-3850
• DOI: 10.1093/pubmed/fdh132

Background There is no validated assessment of an older person’s risk of falling that is easily applied in primary care. We aimed to develop a two‐part tool for use in primary care or the community. Part 1 includes a rapid assessment of the individual’s risk of falling for administration by clinical or non‐clinical staff. Part 2 (for clinical staff) includes guidance on further assessment, referral and interventions. We assessed the predictive validity of part 1. Methods The tool was developed by an expert panel following the updating of an existing systematic review of community‐based prospective studies identifying risk factors for falling and modified in accordance with the feedback from extensive piloting. We assessed predictive validity by a questionnaire survey sent at baseline and 6 months to a random sample of 1000 people aged over 65 in one Primary Care Group area. Results Five items were included in part 1: history of any fall in the previous year, four or more prescribed medications, diagnosis of stroke or Parkinson’s disease, reported problems with balance, inability to rise from a chair without using arms. The presence of three or more risk factors had a positive predictive value for a fall in the next 6 months of 0.57 (95 per cent confidence interval 0.43–0.69). Less than three risk factors had a negative predictive value of 0.86 (0.82–0.89), and a specificity of 0.92 (0.88–0.94). Conclusion The tool may be useful for identifying people who would benefit from further assessment of their risk of falling and appropriate intervention.