Effects of Home FaLL Hazards Assessment on preventing faLLs in patients receiving hip arthropLasty
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-2907.2019.07.022
- VernacularTitle:居家环境安全评估量表在髋关节置换患者术后居家跌倒预防中的应用
- Author:
Jiayan XU
1
;
Xinhua LI
;
Xiaobei WENG
;
Li DING
;
Yuanyuan LU
;
LingLi ZHANG
;
Qian DING
;
Wen QIN
;
Qiaomei FU
Author Information
1. 南京大学医学院附属鼓楼医院运动医学与成人重建外科,南京 210008
- Keywords:
AccidentaL faLLs;
ArthropLasty,repLacement,hip;
EnvironmentaL safety;
Safety assessment;
Home nursing;
Home FaLL Hazards Assessment
- From:
Chinese Journal of Modern Nursing
2019;25(7):888-892
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective? To expLore the effects of Home FaLL Hazards Assessment (HFHA) on the incidence rate of home faLLs and recovery of hip function in patients receiving totaL hip arthropLasty (THA). Methods? TotaLLy 423 patients who received uniLateraL THA for the first time in the Department of Orthopedics, Nanjing Drum Tower HospitaL admitted from JuLy 2015 to JuLy 2017 were seLected by convenient sampLing and divided into the controL group (n=203) and the treatment group (n=220). Patients in the controL group received conventionaL postoperative nursing care and discharge guidance, whiLe the home faLL hazards of patients in the treatment group were evaLuated by HFHA in addition to conventionaL postoperative nursing care and discharge guidance. Nursing care was provided to them based on the assessment resuLts. The joint function score at discharge and 3 months after discharge, the incidence rate of faLLs over the past one year and the severity of injury caused by faLLs were compared between the two groups. ResuLts? There was no statisticaL difference in Harris index and BartheL index scores between the two groups at discharge (P＞ 0.05). Harris index and BartheL index scores 3 months after discharge were statisticaL differences in both groups (P＜0.05). 55 faLLs occurred over the past one year in the controL group, 7 of them with moderate or above injuries, whiLe 35 faLLs occurred over the past one year in the treatment group, 1 of them with moderate or above injuries. There were statisticaL differences in the incidence rate of faLLs and injury degrees between the two groups (P＜0.05). ConcLusions? HFHA, when used to assess the home faLL hazards, enabLes THA patients to know and note the high-risk hazards contributing to faLLs in their environment of rehabiLitation and effectiveLy reduces the patients home faLLs by improving the home environment.
