Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 8, 2025
Author Spotlight: Innovations in iTUG Test for Enhanced Risk Assessment and Cognitive Insights
Published on: October 25, 2024
Validity of the Morse Fall Scale and the Johns Hopkins Fall Risk Assessment Tool for fall risk assessment in an acute
Young Ju Kim1, Kyoung-Ok Choi1, Suk Hyun Cho2
1Department of Nursing, Uijenongbu St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, Uijenongbu, Korea.
Aims And Objectives:
To evaluate the measured fall risk score that more accurately reflects the changeable conditions in acute care settings, and to efficiently evaluate the association between falls and fall risk score.
Background:
The Morse Fall Scale (MFS) is a well-known easy-to-use tool, while the Johns Hopkins Fall Risk Assessment Tool (JHFRAT) consists of items with high specificity. Evaluating suitable fall-risk assessment tools to measure these changeable conditions may contribute to preventing falls in acute care settings.
Design:
Retrospective case-control study using the STROBE checklist.
Methods:
In an acute care setting (708-bedded university hospital with a regional emergency medical centre), the non-fall group was adjusted to fall group using propensity score matching. According to the fall rate of 3-5%, non-fall groups for each tool were selected (1386 and 1947) from the before adjusted data, and the fall groups included 42 and 59. The applied covariates were individual characteristics that ordinarily changed such as age, gender, diagnostic department and hospitalisation period. The adjusted data were analysed using generalised estimating equations and mixed effect model.
Results:
After adjustment, the fall group measured using the JHFRAT had a significantly higher difference between the initial and re-measured total score than the non-fall group. The JHFRAT, especially with the re-measured score, had a higher AUC value for predicting falls than the MFS. MFS's sensitivity was 85.7%, and specificity was 58.8% at 50 points; for JHFRAT, these were 67.8% and 80.2% at 14 points, respectively. These cut-off points were used to evaluate validity during tool development and are commonly used as reference scores.
Conclusions:
JHFRAT more accurately reflects acute changeable conditions related to fall risk measurements after admission.
Relevance To Clinical Practice:
JHFRAT may be useful for effective fall prevention activities in acute care settings.
