Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Jan 6;4(1):e225125.
doi: 10.1001/jamahealthforum.2022.5125.

Cost of Inpatient Falls and Cost-Benefit Analysis of Implementation of an Evidence-Based Fall Prevention Program

Affiliations

Cost of Inpatient Falls and Cost-Benefit Analysis of Implementation of an Evidence-Based Fall Prevention Program

Patricia C Dykes et al. JAMA Health Forum. .

Abstract

Importance: There is insufficient research on the costs of patient falls in health care systems, a leading source of nonreimbursable adverse events.

Objective: To report the costs of inpatient falls and the cost savings associated with implementation of an evidence-based fall prevention program.

Design, setting, and participants: In this economic evaluation, a matched case-control study used the findings from an interrupted time series analysis that assessed changes in fall rates following implementation of an evidence-based fall prevention program to understand the cost of inpatient falls. An economic analysis was then performed to assess the cost benefits associated with program implementation across 2 US health care systems from June 1, 2013, to August 31, 2019, in New York, New York, and Boston, Massachusetts. All adults hospitalized in participating units were included in the analysis. Data analysis was performed from October 2021 to November 2022.

Interventions: Evidence-based fall prevention program implemented in 33 medical and surgical units in 8 hospitals.

Main outcomes and measures: Primary outcome was cost of inpatient falls. Secondary outcome was the costs and cost savings associated with the evidence-based fall prevention program.

Results: A total of 10 176 patients who had a fall event (injurious or noninjurious) with 29 161 matched controls (no fall event) were included in the case-control study and the economic analysis (51.9% were 65-74 years of age, 67.1% were White, and 53.6% were male). Before the intervention, there were 2503 falls and 900 injuries; after the intervention, there were 2078 falls and 758 injuries. Based on a 19% reduction in falls and 20% reduction in injurious falls from the beginning to the end of the postintervention period, the economic analysis demonstrated that noninjurious and injurious falls were associated with cost increases of $35 365 and $36 776, respectively. The implementation of the evidence-based fall prevention program was associated with $14 600 in net avoided costs per 1000 patient-days.

Conclusions and relevance: This economic evaluation found that fall-related adverse events represented a clinical and financial burden to health care systems and that the current Medicare policy limits reimbursement. In this study, costs of falls only differed marginally by injury level. Policies that incentivize organizations to implement evidence-based strategies that reduce the incidence of all falls may be effective in reducing both harm and costs.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Dykes reported receiving grants from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) during the conduct of the study. Dr Franz reported receiving personal and consulting fees from Partners Healthcare as an economist leading cost-benefit analysis. Dr Bogaisky reported receiving a grant from the AHRQ during the conduct of the study. Dr Lindros reported receiving grants from Montefiore Medical Center during the conduct of the study. Dr Bates reported receiving grants from the AHRQ during the conduct of the study, personal fees from EarlySense and CDI Negev; equity from Valera Health, CLEW, MDClone, FeelBetter, and AESOP; personal fees and grants from IBM Watson; and personal fees and equity from Guided Clinical Solutions outside the submitted work. No other disclosures were reported.

Figures

Figure.
Figure.. Preintervention, Electronic Health Record (EHR) Integration/EHR Go-Live, and Postimplementation Periods by Site
aSite 2A (consisting of 26 units within 1 hospital) staggered the postintervention period. All other hospital sites used the same start and end dates for all units. Roman numerals indicate the grouping of when each unit started the postintervention period.

References

    1. Brady AM, Redmond R, Curtis E, et al. Adverse events in health care: a literature review. J Nurs Manag. 2009;17(2):155-164. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2834.2008.00887.x - DOI - PubMed
    1. Rafter N, Hickey A, Condell S, et al. Adverse events in healthcare: learning from mistakes. QJM. 2015;108(4):273-277. doi: 10.1093/qjmed/hcu145 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Quality of Health Care in America; Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS, eds. To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System. National Academies Press; 2000. doi: 10.17226/9728 - DOI - PubMed
    1. David G, Gunnarsson CL, Waters HC, Horblyuk R, Kaplan HS. Economic measurement of medical errors using a hospital claims database. Value Health. 2013;16(2):305-310. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2012.11.010 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Van Den Bos J, Rustagi K, Gray T, Halford M, Ziemkiewicz E, Shreve J. The $17.1 billion problem: the annual cost of measurable medical errors. Health Aff (Millwood). 2011;30(4):596-603. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2011.0084 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types