De-Implementing Fall Prevention Alarms in Hospitals
Funded Grant
Overview
Affiliation
View All
Overview
description
Title: De-Implementing Fall Prevention Alarms in Hospitals Inpatient falls result in significant physical and economic burdens to patients (increased injury and mortality rates and decreased quality of life) as well as to medical organizations (increased lengths of stay, medical care costs, and litigation). The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) considers falls with injury a “never event”— an error in medical care that indicates a real problem in the safety and credibility of a health care institution. Hospitals are no longer reimbursed for extra costs incurred in the diagnosis and management of inpatient fall- related injuries. Thus, because patient falls are common, costly and interpreted as poor care quality, hospitals are highly incentivized to prevent them. Alarm systems are designed to reduce falls by alerting staff when patients attempt to leave a bed or chair without assistance. There is now strong evidence from our group and others that alarms are ineffective as a fall prevention maneuver in hospitals. Despite this, our group has recently shown that more than one-third of hospital patients are undergoing fall prevention alarm monitoring. In nursing homes, CMS regulates the use of fall prevention alarms as it does physical restraints. Instructions to nursing home surveyors state these devices should be used only when medically necessary and continuously reevaluated. Guided by the Choosing Wisely De-implementation Framework, this project will generate a generalizable approach using coaching and tailored de-implementation strategies to reduce use of fall prevention alarms in hospitals. We will conduct a hybrid II implementation study in 30 medical or medical-surgical units from US non-federal hospitals participating in the National Database of Nursing Quality Indicators. Findings from this study could also support future trials aimed at de-implementing low-quality alarm use in other care settings with known high fall rates (e.g., stroke care, cancer care). Evaluation of high versus low intensity coaching addresses an urgent need to evaluate use of tailored strategies and to establish effective thresholds for coaching within health service settings that have varying resources to support de- implementation efforts
