Abstract

Background Little is known about whether off-the-shelf wearable sensor data can contribute to fall risk classification or complement clinical assessment tools such as the Resident Assessment Instrument-Home Care (RAI-HC).Objective This study aimed to (1) investigate the similarities and differences in physical activity (PA), heart rate, and night sleep in a sample of community-dwelling older adults with varying fall histories using a smart wrist-worn device and (2) create and evaluate fall risk classification models based on (i) wearable data, (ii) the RAI-HC, and (iii) the combination of wearable and RAI-HC data.Methods A prospective, observational study was conducted among 3 faller groups (G0, G1, G2+) based on the number of previous falls (0, 1, ≥2 falls) in a sample of older community-dwelling adults. Each participant was requested to wear a smart wristband for 7 consecutive days while carrying out day-to-day activities in their normal lives. The wearable and RAI-HC assessment data were analyzed and utilized to create fall risk classification models, with 3 supervised machine learning algorithms: logistic regression, decision tree, and random forest (RF).Results Of 40 participants aged 65 to 93 years, 16 (40%) had no previous falls, whereas 8 (20%) and 16 (40%) had experienced 1 and multiple (≥2) falls, respectively. Level of PA as measured by average daily steps was significantly different between groups (P=.04). In the 3 faller group classification, RF achieved the best accuracy of 83.8% using both wearable and RAI-HC data, which is 13.5% higher than that of using the RAI-HC data only and 18.9% higher than that of using wearable data exclusively. In discriminating between {G0+G1} and G2+, RF achieved the best area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.894 (overall accuracy of 89.2%) based on wearable and RAI-HC data. Discrimination between G0 and {G1+G2+} did not result in better classification performance than that between {G0+G1} and G2+.Conclusions Both wearable data and the RAI-HC assessment can contribute to fall risk classification. All the classification models revealed that RAI-HC outperforms wearable data, and the best performance was achieved with the combination of 2 datasets. Future studies in fall risk assessment should consider using wearable technologies to supplement resident assessment instruments.

Highlights

  • The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the World Health Organization concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries

  • The relationship between falls and ethnicity and race remains widely open for research, Caucasians living in the United States of America (USA) have higher risk of falling

  • The background papers that underlie this report refer to a considerable body of evidence indicating the effectiveness of a number of interventions for falls prevention

Read more

Summary

Main risk factors for falls

The main risk factors reflect the multitude of health determinants that directly or indirectly affect well-being Those are categorized into four dimensions: biological, behavioural, environmental and socioeconomic factors. Age, gender and race are non-modifiable biological factors These are associated with changes due to ageing such as the decline of physical, cognitive and affective capacities, and the co-morbidity associated with chronic illnesses. Environmental factors encapsulate the interplay of individuals' physical conditions and the surrounding environment, including home hazards and hazardous features in public environment. These factors are not by themselves cause of falls – rather, the interaction between other factors and their exposure to environmental ones. Slippery floor, cracked or uneven sidewalks, and poor lightening in public places are such hazards to injurious falls (see Chapter 3 for further information)

Costs of falls
Main protective factors
Determinants related to health and social services
Determinants related to the physical environment
Determinants related to the social environment
Changing behaviour to prevent falls
Yardley L et al Recommendations for
Chapter V. Examples of effective policies and interventions
Policy
Prevention
Acute care setting: refers to hospitals or rehabilitation units
Concluding remarks
Chapter VI. WHO Falls Prevention Model within the Active Ageing Framework
The need
F Health and
The foundation
Findings
The way forward
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call