Background
The KINDER1 Falls Risk Assessment Tool utilises five screening questions to identify those at risk of falling. A positive response to any of the questions denotes the requirement for risk reduction interventions to be implemented. The documentation of the responses and actions taken should be included in the patient's notes. Ideally the information should be recorded electronically, where alerts with a suitable receipt mechanism can be sent to the relevant team (frailty, physiotherapy) without the need for phone calls. A review should also be undertaken one year after implementation to document the reduction, or not, in falls in the ED.
EMP Risk assessment tool
Hosptal Name: | Patient Addressograph | |
Location in ED: | ||
KINDER1 Falls Assmnt. Tool | ||
Assseesment to be undertaken on all patients aged > 70 years |
||
Question | Yes | No |
---|---|---|
Presented to ED with falls? | ||
Altered mental status/intoxicated? | ||
Impaired mobility/requires assistance? | ||
Age >70years? | ||
Other concerns: Bowel/bladder – incontinence, frequency, Medications – diuretics, laxatives, sedatives |
||
YES to any of the above questions = FALLS RISK |
||
Action plan | Yes | No |
Nurse in area/ Nurse-in-Charge aware? | ||
Falls Risk bracelet applied? | ||
Non-slip socks applied? | ||
Transferred to high-visibility area? | ||
Additional intervention required? If yes, please specify | ||
Signed | Date | Time |
Links
References (from EMP, not EMed verified)
- Condren J (2023) Reducing the risk of falls among patients in the Emergency Department: A Quality Improvement Project. SpR in Emergency Medicine
- Alexander D, Kinsley TL, Waszinski C (2013) Journey to a safe environment: fall preventions in an emergency department at a level 1 trauma center. J Emerg Nurs, 39 (4) (2013), pp. 346-352. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0099176712005508?via%3Dihub
- Townsend AB, Valle-Ortiz M, Sansweet T (2016) A Successful ED Fall Risk Program Using the KINDER 1 Fall Risk Assessment Tool. J Emerg Nurs, 42 (6) (2016) pp. 492-497.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jen.2012.11.003