@article{ref1,
title="Failure of falls risk screening tools to predict outcome: a prospective cohort study",
journal="Emergency medicine journal",
year="2018",
author="Harper, Kristie J. and Barton, Annette D. and Arendts, Glenn and Edwards, Deborah G. and Petta, Antonio C. and Celenza, Antonio",
volume="35",
number="1",
pages="28-32",
abstract="OBJECTIVE: To compare the Falls Risk for Older Persons-Community Setting Screening Tool (FROP Com Screen) with the Two-Item Screening Tool in older adults presenting to the ED. <br><br>METHODS: A prospective cohort study, comparing the efficacy of the two falls risk assessment tools by applying them simultaneously in a sample of hospital ED presentations. <br><br>RESULTS: Two hundred and one patients over 65 years old were recruited. Thirty-six per cent reported falls in the 6-month follow-up period. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.57 (95% CI 0.48 to 0.66) for the FROP Com Screen and 0.54 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.63) for the Two-Item Screening Tool. FROP Com Screen had a sensitivity of 39% (95% CI 0.27 to 0.51) and a specificity of 70% (95% CI 0.61 to 0.78), while the Two-Item Screening Tool had a sensitivity of 48% (95% CI 0.36 to 0.60) and a specificity of 57% (95% CI 0.47 to 0.66). <br><br>CONCLUSION: Both tools have limited predictive ability in the ED setting.<br><br>© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.<p /> <p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="1472-0205",
doi="10.1136/emermed-2016-206233",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/emermed-2016-206233"
}