Falls Risk Assessment Tool (FRAT): Difference between revisions


 

Line 7: Line 7:

== Introduction ==

== Introduction ==

[[File:Falling.png|right|frameless]]

[[File:Falling.png|right|frameless]]

[[Falls in elderly|Falls]] are problematic within the elderly population. Falls are the second leading cause of accidental injury deaths worldwide. Each year an estimated 684 000 individuals die from falls worldwide. Adults older than 60 years of age experience the greatest number of fatal falls.<ref>WHO Falls Available:https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/falls (accessed 2.11.2022)</ref>  

[[Falls in elderly|Falls]] are within the elderly population. Falls are the secondleading cause of accidental injury deaths worldwide. Each yearan estimated 684 000 individuals die from falls worldwide. Adults older than 60 years of age experience the greatest number of fatal falls.<ref>WHO Falls Available:https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/falls (accessed 2.11.2022)</ref>  

A range of tools are available to health care providers to identify those at risk of falling. Tools include: Falls Risk Assessment Tool (FRAT); [[Berg Balance Scale]]; [[Timed Up and Go Test (TUG)]]; [[The Balance Outcome Measure for Elder Rehabilitation (BOOMER)|The Balance Outcome Measure for Elder Rehabilitation (BOOMER).]]  

A range of tools are available to health care providers to identify those at risk of falling. Tools include: Falls Risk Assessment Tool (FRAT); [[Berg Balance Scale]]; [[Timed Up and Go Test (TUG)]]; [[The Balance Outcome Measure for Elder Rehabilitation (BOOMER)|The Balance Outcome Measure for Elder Rehabilitation (BOOMER).]]  

 

 

=== ”’FRAT”’ ===

=== ”’FRAT”’ ===

Falls are common within the elderly population. Adverse effects of falsl include fracture, fear of falling, and death. Falls are the second-leading cause of accidental injury deaths worldwide. Each year, an estimated 684 000 individuals die from falls worldwide. Adults older than 60 years of age experience the greatest number of fatal falls.[1]

Falls are taken into account as an assessment of the quality of care, and fall prevention is a component of quality control systems. A patient’s risk of falling is objectively assessed by a fall risk assessment. A range of tools are available to health care providers to identify those at risk of falling. A number of tools have been designed for assessing fall risk. Tools include: the Falls Risk Assessment Tool (FRAT); the Berg Balance Scale; Timed Up and Go Test (TUG); The Balance Outcome Measure for Elder Rehabilitation (BOOMER).

Development

In 1999, the Peninsula Health Prevention Service developed the Falls Risk Assessment Tool (FRAT). Previous assessments of research indicated fall risk variables among older community members. It was a two-year research project

FRAT[edit | edit source]

It is a 4-item falls-risk screening tool for sub-acute and residential care. The FRAT has three sections:

  • Part 1 – falls risk status.
  • Part 2 – risk factor checklist.
  • Part 3 – action plan[2].

FRAT.jpg

A full copy of the FRAT tool can be accessed via the following link: [1]

Include:

  • Risk Factor Checklist (Part 2) fails to appreciate balance specifically. If this was a self-reported concern of the patient, areas of proprioception and the vestibular system could be objectively looked at in more depth within specialist physiotherapy. assessment.
  • Lacks context – eludes to being objective however fails to provide any guidance on questioning to obtain further information. Area for development – extended box to record subjective and objective measures.
  • NICE guidelines state the FRAT does not assess all the risk variables highlighted in their guidelines for falls prevention. Furthermore, NICE state it should not be relied solely on to assess risk of falls and requires further investigation[3]. If high falls risk is identified, more extensive assessment is required – e.g. Elderly Mobility Scale to provide objective measures that guide physiotherapy treatment.
  • Nowhere to record a collateral history. Having an area to collect information would allow for exploration into issues and areas highlighted in Part 2.
  • ‘History of Falls’ section lacks ability to record detailed mechanics of fall. Tick boxes can be supported by a descriptive component. (See ‘Potential Modifications to the FRAT’).
  • Cognitive test included is rather outdated and cannot be relied on to confirm cognitive impairment.
  • Recommendation: carry out with several members of MDT present to incorporate areas of expertise.

Potential Modifications to the FRAT[edit | edit source]

During the process of evaluating the FRAT, there is a perceived lack of depth pertaining to the falls section. It is proposed that some amendments could be made to this in order to improve clarity and increase information and reliability.

Current ‘History of Falls’ Section:

FRAT falls history.jpg

Potential Developments:

FRAT falls history improved.jpg

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *