Longitudinal associations of concurrent falls and fear of falling with functional limitations differ by living alone or not

Older women's perspectives on the ethics of persuasion in doctor-patient communication

BACKGROUND

Public health campaigns have often used persuasive techniques to promote healthy behaviors but the use of persuasion by doctors is controversial. We sought to examine older women's perspectives.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured interviews with 20 community-dwelling older women from the Baltimore metropolitan area. We asked whether participants thought it was ethically appropriate for doctors to try to persuade patients and explored their rationales. We probed about commonly used persuasive techniques and two example decisional contexts-stopping mammograms and moving out of one's house after multiple falls. We used qualitative thematic analysis to code the transcripts and summarized results into major themes.

RESULTS

We found mixed views on the ethical appropriateness of persuasion (theme 1); supporters of persuasion were motivated by the potential benefit to patients' health, whereas opponents thought patients should be the ultimate decision-makers. Perspectives depended on the persuasive technique (theme 2), where emotional appeals elicited the most negative reactions while use of facts and patient stories were viewed more positively. Perspectives also varied by the decisional context (theme 3), where higher severity and certainty of harm influenced participants to be more accepting of persuasion. Participants suggested alternative communication approaches to persuasion (theme 4) that emphasized respect for patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that the type of persuasive technique and the decisional context are important considerations in the ethical debate around the use of persuasion. Limiting the use of persuasion to high-stakes decisions and using facts and patient stories rather than emotional appeals are likely more acceptable.

The global prevalence of and risk factors for fear of falling among older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

As a common psychological problem among older adults, fear of falling was found to have a wide range prevalence in different studies. However, the global prevalence of it was unknown and a lack of the large sample confirmed its risk factors.

OBJECTIVES

To report the global prevalence of fear of falling and to explore its risk factors among older adults for further developing precise interventions to systematically manage FOF.

DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted by PRISMA guidelines.

METHODS

Searches were conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and the manual search in August 20, 2022, updated to September 2, 2023. Observational studies published in English were included and two researchers independently screened and extracted the data. Fixed or random effects mode was used to estimate the pooled prevalence of and risk factors for fear of falling. Heterogeneity resources were analyzed by subgroup and sensitivity analysis. Publication bias was assessed through funnel plots, Egger's test and Begg's test.

RESULTS

A total of the 153 studies with 200,033 participants from 38 countries worldwide were identified. The global prevalence of fear of falling was 49.60%, ranging from 6.96-90.34%. Subgroup analysis found the estimates pooled prevalence of it was higher in developing countries (53.40%) than in developed countries (46.7%), and higher in patients (52.20%) than in community residents (48.40%). In addition, twenty-eight risk factors were found a significant associations with fear of falling, mainly including demographic characteristics, physical function, chronic diseases and mental problems.

CONCLUSION

The global prevalence of FOF was high, especially in developing countries and in patients. Demographic characteristics, Physical function, chronic diseases and mental problems were a significant association with FOF. Policy-makers, health care providers and government officials should comprehensively evaluate these risk factors and formulate precise intervention measures to reduce FOF.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was registered in the International Database of Prospectively Registered Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO): CRD42022358031.