Prospective monitoring and self-report of previous falls among older women at high risk of falls and fractures: a study of comparison and agreement

BACKGROUND The identification of the occurrence of falls is an important step for screening and for rehabilitation processes for the elderly. The methods of monitoring these events are susceptible to recording biases, and the choice of the most accurate method remains challenging. OBJECTIVES (i) To investigate the agreement between retrospective self-reporting and prospective monitoring of methods of recording falls, and (ii) to compare the retrospective self-reporting of falls and the prospective monitoring of falls and recurrent falls over a 12-month period among older women at high risk of falls and fractures. METHOD A total of 118 community-dwelling older women with low bone density were recruited. The incidence of falls was monitored prospectively in 116 older women (2 losses) via monthly phone calls over the course of a year. At the end of this monitoring period, the older women were asked about their recall of falls in the same 12-month period. The agreement between the two methods was analyzed, and the sensitivity and specificity of self-reported previous falls in relation to the prospective monitoring were calculated. RESULTS There was moderate agreement between the prospective monitoring and the retrospective self-reporting of falls in classifying fallers (Kappa = 0.595) and recurrent fallers (Kappa = 0.589). The limits of agreement were 0.35 ± 1.66 falls. The self-reporting of prior falls had a 67.2% sensitivity and a 94.2% specificity in classifying fallers among older women and a 50% sensitivity and a 98.9% specificity in classifying recurrent fallers. CONCLUSION Self-reporting of falls over a 12-month period underestimated 32.8% of falls and 50% of recurrent falls. The findings recommend caution if one is considering replacing monthly monitoring with annual retrospective questioning.