Adding value to the STRATIFY falls risk assessment in acute hospitals
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 6, 2026

Cutoff Value of Phase Angle by Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis at Admission as a Prognostic Factor in Patients with Acute Heart Failure
Published on: June 10, 2025
Anna Barker1, Jeannette Kamar, Marnie Graco
1Northern Clinical Research Centre, The Northern Hospital, Epping, Victoria, Australia. anna.barker@monash.edu.au
Aim:
This paper is a report of a study conducted to compare the predictive accuracy for fallers of The Northern Hospital Modified St Thomas's Risk Assessment Tool and St Thomas's Risk Assessment Tool, and to determine the inter-rater agreement of each tool.
Background:
Falls risk assessment is a key component of fall prevention. Investigation of clinimetric properties of a tool should be completed before it are used in clinical practice.
Methods:
Local falls data were used to inform modification of the St Thomas's Risk Assessment Tool to improve faller prediction. Clinimetric properties of the St Thomas's Risk Assessment Tool and The Northern Hospital Modified St Thomas's Risk Assessment Tool were examined in a prospective cross-sectional study with acute hospital patients. Phase I involved assessment of predictive accuracy using sensitivity, specificity and the Youden Index (J) with 263 patients. Phase II of the evaluation involved assessment of inter-rater agreement using the Kappa statistic (κ) with 52 patients. Data were collected in 2008.
Results:
Impaired balance, age 80 years and older and drug and alcohol problems were identified as additional falls risk factors in The Northern Hospital population and added to the St Thomas's Risk Assessment Tool. The Northern Hospital Modified St Thomas's Risk Assessment Tool had higher sensitivity (0·65 vs. 0·35, P = 0·016). The St Thomas's Risk Assessment Tool had higher specificity (0·93 vs. 0·79, P = 0·000). The Northern Hospital Modified St Thomas's Risk Assessment Tool had the greater overall accuracy (J) (0·44 vs. 0·28, P = 0·006). Inter-rater agreement of The Northern Hospital Modified St Thomas's Risk Assessment Tool was fair (κ = 0·34) and low for the St Thomas's Risk Assessment Tool (κ = 0·19).
Conclusion:
The Northern Hospital Modified St Thomas's Risk Assessment Tool and St Thomas's Risk Assessment Tool accurately identified patients at risk of falling. The Northern Hospital Modified St Thomas's Risk Assessment Tool was more accurate. Tools which have unknown validity and reliability should not be used. Future research is needed to provide evidence that use of falls risk assessments has a positive impact on reducing patient falls.
More Related Videos
06:52Assessment of Dependence in Activities of Daily Living Among Older Patients in an Acute Care Unit
Published on: September 30, 2020
04:05Clinical Application of Phase Angle and BIVA Z-Score Analyses in Patients Admitted to an Emergency Department with Acute Heart Failure
Published on: June 30, 2023
Related Concept Videos
Planning Nursing Care I
Respiratory Assessment: Purpose and Indications
Objectives and Importance:
The primary goal of respiratory assessment is to evaluate patients at early risk of clinical deterioration. Since respiratory distress often precedes other signs of declining health, breathing patterns and sounds become a...
Traditional Level Of Health Care System
The preventive healthcare service includes tests for screening. Preventive health care services include identifying and reducing disease risk...
Acute Coronary Syndrome IV: Interprofessional Care
Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
Documentation in Long-Term and Home Healthcare Setting
Long-Term Care Facilities