Effectiveness of interventions to prevent falls for people with multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease and stroke: an umbrella review.

BACKGROUND: The implementation of condition-specific falls prevention interventions is proving challenging due to lack of critical mass and resources. Given the similarities in falls risk factors across stroke, Parkinson's Disease (PD) and Multiple Sclerosis (MS), the development of an intervention designed for groups comprising of people with these three neurological conditions may provide a pragmatic solution to these challenges. The aims of this umbrella review were to investigate the effectiveness of falls prevention interventions in MS, PD and stroke, and to identify the commonalities and differences between effective interventions for each condition to inform the development of an intervention for mixed neurological groups. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted using 15 electronic databases, grey literature searches and hand-screening of reference lists. Systematic reviews of studies investigating the effects of falls prevention interventions in MS, PD and stroke were included. Methodological quality of reviews was assessed using the A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2. A matrix of evidence table was used to assess the degree of overlap. The Grading of Recommendations Assessments, Development and Evaluation framework was used to rate the quality of evidence. Findings were presented through narrative synthesis and a summary of evidence table. RESULTS: Eighteen reviews were included; three investigating effectiveness of falls prevention interventions in MS, 11 in PD, three in stroke, and one in both PD and stroke. Exercise-based interventions were the most commonly investigated for all three conditions, but differences were identified in the content and delivery of these interventions. Low to moderate quality evidence was found for the effectiveness of exercise-based interventions at reducing falls in PD. Best available evidence suggests that exercise is effective at reducing falls in stroke but no evidence of effect was identified in MS. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that exercise-based interventions are effective at reducing falls in PD, however, the evidence for MS and stroke is less conclusive. A strong theoretical rationale remains for the use of exercise-based interventions to address modifiable physiological falls risk factors for people with MS, PD and stroke, supporting the feasibility of a mixed-diagnosis intervention. Given the high overlap and low methodological quality of primary studies, the focus should be on the development of high-quality trials investigating the effectiveness of falls prevention interventions, rather than the publication of further systematic reviews.

Outcomes of importance to people with multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease and stroke following a falls prevention intervention: a qualitative study to inform a core outcome set.

Purpose: Falls are a major issue for people with neurological conditions, and the evaluation of falls prevention interventions is of high priority. To date, the views of patient groups regarding outcomes of importance have been largely overlooked. The purpose of this study was to explore outcomes of interest among people with Multiple Sclerosis (MS), Parkinson's disease (PD) and stroke upon completion of falls prevention interventions to inform the development of a core outcome set (COS).Materials and methods: Five online focus groups and one semi-structured interview were conducted among people with PD (n = 10), MS (n = 7), and post-stroke (n = 3), one of whom also had PD. Transcripts were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.Results: Four themes were developed; (1) Fall events are not homogeneous, (2) Exercise-based programmes are beneficial but falls services are not meeting user needs, (3) Programme success beyond the reduction in falls, and (4) Acquisition of skills to self-manage falls beyond the life of the programme.Conclusions: This study presents new perspectives across patient groups regarding important outcomes upon completion of falls prevention interventions. Taken together with the findings of a literature review, this data will inform the development of a COS.Implications for rehabilitationPeople with multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease and stroke consider the success of a falls prevention intervention to be dependent on improvements across a wide range of outcomes.The design and implementation of falls prevention interventions should align with patient preferences.Clinicians and researchers should consider the use of multidomain interventions to facilitate improvements in the desired outcomes of patients.

A core outcome set for evaluating the effectiveness of mixed-diagnosis falls prevention interventions for people with Multiple Sclerosis, Parkinson's Disease and stroke.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical trials evaluating the effectiveness of falls prevention interventions for people with Multiple Sclerosis (MS), Parkinson's Disease (PD) and stroke measure heterogeneous outcomes, often omitting those meaningful to patients. A core outcome set (COS) is a standardised set of outcomes that should be assessed in all trials within a research area. The aim of this study was to develop a COS for evaluating mixed-diagnosis falls prevention interventions for people with MS, PD and stroke in non-acute and community settings, with input from relevant stakeholder groups. METHODS: Previously published research undertaken by the team, including a qualitative study with 20 patients and a review of the literature, were used to derive a longlist of potential outcomes. Outcomes were prioritised for inclusion in the COS using a three-round online Delphi survey. A multi-stakeholder, consensus meeting was conducted to agree upon the final COS and to provide a recommendation for a single outcome measure for each outcome in the COS. RESULTS: Forty-eight participants were recruited across four stakeholder groups (researchers, patients, clinicians, and service-planners/policymakers). A total of 42 participants (87.5%) completed all three rounds of the surveys. Sixty-two outcomes were considered for inclusion in the COS throughout the Delphi process. A total of 15 participants attended the consensus meeting where they agreed upon the final COS and accompanying measurement instruments: fall incidence, injurious fall incidence, quality of life, falls self-efficacy, fear of falling, activity curtailment due to fear of falling, and cost-effectiveness. Attendees at the consensus meeting recommended that the proposed mechanism of impact of an intervention is considered when selecting additional outcomes outside of those in the COS to assess. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified a COS for evaluating the effectiveness of mixed-diagnosis falls prevention interventions for people with MS, PD and stroke. It is recommended that this COS and accompanying measurement instruments be used in all future trials in this research area so that findings can be combined and compared.

Fall definitions, faller classifications and outcomes used in falls research among people with multiple sclerosis: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: To identify the definitions of a fall, faller classifications and outcomes used in prospectively-recorded falls research among people with Multiple Sclerosis (MS). METHODS: A systematic review of peer-reviewed journal articles was conducted using electronic databases. Relevant data were extracted by one reviewer and verified by a second independent reviewer. RESULTS: Twenty-six papers met the inclusion criteria. A relative degree of heterogeneity existed amongst studies for the outcomes of interest to this review. Thirteen different fall definitions were identified. Fourteen different falls outcomes were used across the included studies, with six of these reported by only one study each. Data regarding injurious falls were presented by only eight papers. The majority (n = 17) of papers classified individuals as a faller if they fell at least once. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights the large variation in fall definitions, faller classifications and outcomes used in this research field. This hinders cross-comparison and pooling of data, thereby preventing researchers and clinicians from drawing conclusive findings from existing literature. The creation of an international standard for the definition of a fall, faller classification and falls outcomes would allow for transparent and coordinated falls research for people with MS, facilitating progression in this research field.Implications for rehabilitationFalls are a common occurrence among people with Multiple Sclerosis (MS) resulting in numerous negative consequences.There is large heterogeneity in the definitions, methods and outcomes used in falls research for people with MS.This lack of standardisation prevents the accurate cross-comparison and pooling of data, impeding the identification of falls risk factors and effective falls prevention interventions for people with MS.Consequently, clinicians should interpret the outcomes of falls research for people with MS with caution, particularly when comparing studies regarding falls risk assessments and falls prevention interventions for use in clinical practice.

Protocol for the development of a core outcome set for evaluating mixed-diagnosis falls prevention interventions for people with Multiple Sclerosis, Parkinson's Disease and stroke.

Background: Given the high incidence of falls and their associated negative effects, the development of effective falls prevention interventions for people with Multiple Sclerosis (MS), Parkinson's Disease (PD) and stroke is a priority. Currently the implementation of condition-specific falls prevention interventions is challenging in the community due to lack of participants and resources. Given the similarities in falls risk factors across stroke, PD and MS, the design of mixed-diagnosis interventions for groups comprising of people with these three neurological conditions may solve these implementation challenges. Having a core outcome set (COS) for evaluating these interventions would enable the comparison and combination of data, thereby facilitating progress in this research area. Therefore, the aim of this research study is to develop a COS for evaluating mixed-diagnosis falls prevention interventions for people with MS, PD and stroke. Methods: This will be a mixed-methods, international, multi-perspective Delphi consensus study with five stages. Stage one will involve the identification of potential outcomes through a systematic literature search, patient focus groups, and consultation with our Public and Patient Involvement (PPI) panel. The second stage will be the development of the Delphi survey using the outcomes elicited from stage one. Stage three will be the prioritisation of outcomes using a two-round online Delphi survey involving patients, clinicians, researchers and policy-makers/service-planners. The fourth stage will be to identify and recommend outcome measures and definitions. The final stage will be a consensus meeting with representatives from each stakeholder group to agree upon the final COS. Discussion: Adoption of this COS in future trials investigating the effectiveness of mixed-diagnosis falls prevention interventions for people with MS, PD and stroke will facilitate the comparison and combination of research findings. This should translate into improved decision-making by service-planners/policy-makers and clinicians regarding the implementation of evidence-based falls prevention interventions into practice.

Development of the Better Balance Program for People with Multiple Sclerosis: A Complex Fall-Prevention Intervention.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 56% of people with multiple sclerosis (MS) will fall in any 3-month period, with the potential for physical, psychological, and social consequences. Fall-prevention research for people with MS is in its infancy, with a timely need to develop theory-based interventions that reflect the complexity of falls. The clear articulation of the development of any complex intervention is paramount to its future evaluation, usability, and effectiveness. Our aim was to describe how the development of Better Balance, a complex multicomponent fall-prevention intervention for people with MS, was guided by the Medical Research Council framework for the development of complex interventions. METHODS: Sources of information included existing literature, original research, clinician interviews, and views of people with MS. These sources were synthesized and refined through an iterative process of intervention development involving researchers, clinicians, and people with MS. RESULTS: The resulting intervention is outlined through a variety of key tasks supplementing the original Medical Research Council framework. Use of this framework resulted in a theoretically based and user-informed complex intervention designed to address the physiological, personal, and behavioral risk factors associated with falls in people with MS. CONCLUSIONS: The articulation of the systematic process used to develop Better Balance will inform the future evaluation and usability of the intervention.

Effectiveness of non-pharmacological falls prevention interventions for people with Multiple Sclerosis, Parkinson's Disease and stroke: protocol for an umbrella review.

Background: Falls are common among people with neurological diseases and are associated with many negative physical, psychosocial and economic consequences. Implementation of single diagnosis falls prevention interventions is currently problematic due to lack of participants and resources. Given the similarities in falls risk factors across stroke, Parkinson's Disease (PD) and Multiple Sclerosis (MS), the development of an intervention designed for mixed neurological populations seems plausible and may provide a solution to current implementation challenges. This umbrella review aims to summarise the totality of evidence regarding the effectiveness of non-pharmacological falls prevention interventions for people with MS, PD and stroke and to identify the commonalities and differences between interventions that are effective for each disease to inform the development of an intervention for mixed diagnoses. Methods: This umbrella review will be conducted and reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Electronic databases and grey literature will be searched. Systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials (RCTS) and studies investigating the effects of non-pharmacological falls prevention interventions on falls outcomes among people with MS, PD and stroke will be included. Methodological quality of included reviews will be assessed using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 tool. The Grading of Recommendations Assessments, Development and Evaluation framework will be used to rate the quality of evidence. A summary of evidence table and narrative synthesis will be utilised to clearly indicate the findings. Discussion: This umbrella review presents a novel and timely approach to synthesise existing falls literature to identify effective non-pharmacological interventions for people with MS, PD and stroke. Of importance, this umbrella review will use a robust methodology to explore the key differences and similarities in effective interventions for individuals with these neurological diseases to facilitate the development of an intervention for mixed neurological groups.