BackgroundFalls of elderly people may cause permanent disability or death. Particularly susceptible are elderly patients in rehabilitation hospitals. We systematically reviewed the literature to identify falls prediction tools available for assessing elderly inpatients in rehabilitation hospitals.Methods and FindingsWe searched six electronic databases using comprehensive search strategies developed for each database. Estimates of sensitivity and specificity were plotted in ROC space graphs and pooled across studies. Our search identified three studies which assessed the prediction properties of falls prediction tools in a total of 754 elderly inpatients in rehabilitation hospitals. Only the STRATIFY tool was assessed in all three studies; the other identified tools (PJC-FRAT and DOWNTON) were assessed by a single study. For a STRATIFY cut-score of two, pooled sensitivity was 73% (95%CI 63 to 81%) and pooled specificity was 42% (95%CI 34 to 51%). An indirect comparison of the tools across studies indicated that the DOWNTON tool has the highest sensitivity (92%), while the PJC-FRAT offers the best balance between sensitivity and specificity (73% and 75%, respectively). All studies presented major methodological limitations.ConclusionsWe did not identify any tool which had an optimal balance between sensitivity and specificity, or which were clearly better than a simple clinical judgment of risk of falling. The limited number of identified studies with major methodological limitations impairs sound conclusions on the usefulness of falls risk prediction tools in geriatric rehabilitation hospitals.

Carpet flooring, vertigo, being an amputee, confusion, cognitive impairment, stroke, sleep disturbance, anticonvulsants, tranquilizers and antihypertensive medications, age between 71 and 80, previous falls, and need for transfer assistance are risk factors for geriatric patient falls in rehabilitation hospital settings.

AimTo examine older people and their families’ perceptions about their experiences with interprofessional teams.DesignNaturalistic inquiry using qualitative descriptive methods to provide a comprehensive summary of older people and their families’ experiences with interprofessional teams.MethodsInterviews were conducted with 22 people from 11 families. The families had experiences with teams in a variety of settings, such as community, residential care and hospital. Data were analysed using inductive content analysis. NiVivo was used to record preliminary codes. Analysis included comparing and contrasting families’ experiences.ResultsOlder people and their families wanted communication about what was going on, regardless of whether the news was good, bad or unknown. They also wanted care that took the concerns of the older person into consideration. Communication was a necessary ingredient to ensuring that the older person's unique concerns were known to the interprofessional team. These percepectives were discussed in the themes of communication and patient‐centred care.

The intervention programme was effective in reducing falls among geriatric rehabilitation patients.

We conducted a scoping study to examine how interprofessional health care teams improve the outcomes of older adults experiencing cognitive challenges. We searched Ovid, Medline 1946, and MEDLINE In-Process and other non-indexed citations, using the concepts multi or interdisciplinary care teams, confusion or cognitive impairment, and elderly adults. Of 4,554 articles the review yielded, 34 relevant to our inquiry, using Arksey and O’Malley’s methodological framework. Twenty-nine per cent of authors reported on the processes interprofessional teams use to achieve positive outcomes for older adults. They highlighted the importance of communication, staff strategies, and education interventions in achieving outcomes with older adults and in supporting interprofessional collaboration. The review revealed knowledge gaps about the processes teams use to collaborate in caring for older adults experiencing cognitive challenges, and how to best incorporate older adults and their families’ perspectives in team decisions. More research to understand processes interprofessional teams use is needed.