Falls and Fear of Falling After Stroke: A Case‐Control Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Falls are common after stroke, with potentially serious consequences. Few investigations have included age-matched control participants to directly compare fall characteristics between older adults with and without stroke. Further, fear of falling, a significant psychological consequence of falls, has only been examined to a limited degree as a risk factor for future falls in a stroke population. OBJECTIVE: To compare the fall history between older adults with and without a previous stroke and to identify the determinants of falls and fear of falling in older stroke survivors. DESIGN: Case-control observational study. SETTING: Primary teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Seventy-five patients with stroke (mean age ± standard deviation, 66 ± 7 years) and 50 age-matched control participants with no previous stroke were tested. METHODS: test was performed to compare characteristics between groups, and logistic regression was performed to determine the risk factors for falls and fear of falling. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Fall events in the past 12 months, Fall Efficacy Scale-International, Berg Balance Scale, Functional Ambulation Category, Fatigue Severity Scale, Montreal Cognitive Assessment, and Patient Healthy Questionnaire-9 were measured for all participants. Fugl-Meyer Motor Assessment was used to quantify severity of stroke motor impairments. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients and 13 control participants reported at least one fall in the past 12 months (P = .58). Nine participants with stroke had recurrent falls (≥2 falls) compared with none of the control participants (P < .01). Participants with stroke reported greater concern for falling than did nonstroke control participants (P < .01). Female gender was associated with falls in the nonstroke group, whereas falls in the stroke group were not significantly associated with any measured outcomes. Fear of falling in the stroke group was associated with functional ambulation level and balance. Functional ambulation level alone explained 22% of variance in fear of falling in the stroke group. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with persons without a stroke, patients with stroke were significantly more likely to experience recurrent falls and fear of falling. Falls in patients with stroke were not explained by any of the outcome measures used, whereas fear of falling was predicted by functional ambulation level. This study has identified potentially modifiable risk factors with which to devise future prevention strategies for falls in patients with stroke. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».