Making Fall Risk Assessment Clinically Relevant in an Adult Psychiatric Setting.

Area of Science:

• Nursing
• Patient Safety
• Psychiatric Care

Background:

• Patient falls are a significant concern in psychiatric settings.
• Accurate fall risk assessment is crucial for preventing injuries.
• Existing tools may have limitations in user-friendliness and clinical relevance.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare psychiatric nurses' perceptions of the Edmonson Psychiatric Falls Risk Assessment Tool (EPFRAT) versus the Morse Fall Scale (MFS).
• To evaluate the impact of EPFRAT implementation on patient falls with injury rates.
• To assess the usability and clinical utility of EPFRAT in psychiatric nursing.

Main Methods:

• A descriptive, non-experimental study involving 25 psychiatric clinical nurses.
• Comparison of EPFRAT and MFS for fall risk assessment in 216 adult psychiatric patients over 3 months.
• Analysis of patient falls with injury rates for 12 months pre- and post-EPFRAT implementation.

Main Results:

• Nurses perceived EPFRAT as more user-friendly and relevant than MFS.
• EPFRAT use improved nurses' clinical judgment in identifying high-risk patients.
• Patient falls with injury rates decreased by 0.52 per 1,000 patient care days after EPFRAT implementation.

Conclusions:

• Psychiatric nurses demonstrated support for adopting EPFRAT over MFS.
• EPFRAT shows promise in enhancing fall risk assessment and reducing patient injuries in psychiatric units.
• The findings suggest a potential practice change towards utilizing EPFRAT for improved patient safety.