RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To identify and quantify risk factors for in-hospital falls in medical patients. DATA SOURCES: Six databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, and Google Scholar) were systematically screened until April 11, 2023, to identify relevant articles. STUDY SELECTION: All titles and abstracts of the retrieved articles were independently screened by two researchers who also read the full texts of the remaining articles. Quantitative studies that assessed risk factors for falls among adult patients acutely hospitalized were included in the review. Publications that did not capture internal medicine patients or focused on other specific populations were excluded. DATA EXTRACTION: Information on study characteristics and potential risk factors were systematically extracted. Risk of bias was assessed using the Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool. PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines were followed for reporting. DATA SYNTHESIS: The main outcome was any in-hospital falls. Using a random-effects meta-analysis model, association measures for each risk factor reported in five or more studies were pooled. Separate analyses according to effect measure and studies adjusted for sex and age at least were performed. Of 5,067 records retrieved, 119 original publications from 25 countries were included. In conclusion, 23 potential risk factors were meta-analyzed. Strong evidence with large effect sizes was found for a history of falls (ORâ¯2.54; 95% CI 1.63- 3.96; I2 91%), antidepressants (pooled ORâ¯2.25; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.92-2.65; I2 0%), benzodiazepines (ORâ¯1.97; 95% CI 1.68-2.31; I2 0%), hypnotics-sedatives (ORâ¯1.90; 95% CI 1.53-2.36; I2 46%), and antipsychotics (ORâ¯1.61; 95% CI 1.33-1.95; I2 0%). Furthermore, evidence of associations with male sex (OR 1.22, 95% CI 0.99-1.50, I2 65%) and age (OR 1.17, 95% CI 1.02-1.35, I2 72%) were found, but effect sizes were small. CONCLUSIONS: The comprehensive list of risk factors, which specifies the strength of evidence and effect sizes, could assist in the prioritization of preventive measures and interventions.
RESUMEN
Dyslipidemia is a modifiable risk factor for cardiovascular diseases. Recommendations are based on achieving LDL-C target levels, but it is essential to assess the benefits of intensifying lipid-lowering therapy in terms of absolute risk reduction of cardiovascular events across different risk groups. Current data on the absolute benefits of the latest lipid-lowering treatments are more limited in comparison with statins. A recent analysis showed that adding a second lipid-lowering treatment only reduces the absolute cardiovascular risk in patients at very high and high cardiovascular risk, without a substantial benefit in patients at moderate or low cardiovascular risk, as mentioned in the recent recommendations free of conflict of interest and published in the British Medical Journal.
La dyslipidémie est un facteur de risque modifiable des maladies cardiovasculaires. Les recommandations sont basées sur l'atteinte de valeurs cibles du LDL-C mais il est essentiel d'évaluer les avantages de l'intensification du traitement hypolipémiant en termes de réduction du risque absolu d'événements cardiovasculaires dans les différents groupes à risque. Les données actuelles sur le bénéfice des nouveaux traitements hypolipémiants sont plus limitées comparées aux statines. Une analyse récente a montré que l'addition d'un second traitement hypolipémiant réduit le risque cardiovasculaire (CV) absolu uniquement chez les patients avec un risque CV très élevé ou élevé, sans bénéfice absolu substantiel chez les patients à risque CV modéré ou faible, ce qui a été repris des recommandations internationales sans conflit d'intérêts dans le British Medical Journal.