Falls efficacy is a widely studied construct. The understanding of falls efficacy has evolved over time. Falls efficacy was initially perceived to be suitably used as a measure of fear of falling. However, further research suggested that falls efficacy and fear of falling are distinct constructs, and therefore, would be inappropriate to be used as a proxy. Instead, some researchers posited that falls efficacy is synonymous with balance confidence. Falls efficacy has been conventionally understood as the perceived ability of individuals to perform activities without losing balance or falling. A recently conducted systematic review by the authors on existing falls efficacy related measures had revealed a fresh perspective of recognising falls efficacy as a perceived ability to manage a threat of a fall. Falls efficacy, with a broadened interpreted construct, relates to the individual’s perceived self-efficacy of performing necessary actions needed in different scenarios, including pre-fall, near-fall, fall-landing and completed fall. The conventional interpretation of falls efficacy needs a rethinking of perspective. An extended understanding of falls efficacy would provide an integral approach towards improving the agency of individual to deal with falls and would enhance person-centred care.

Background: Falls efficacy is a widely-studied latent construct in community-dwelling older adults. Various self-reported instruments have been used to measure falls efficacy. In order to be informed of the choice of the best measurement instrument for a specific purpose, empirical evidence of the development and measurement properties of falls efficacy related instruments is needed. Methods: The Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Intruments (COSMIN) checklist was used to summarise evidence on the development, content validity, and structural validity of instruments measuring falls efficacy in community-dwelling older adults. Databases including MEDLINE, Web of Science, PsychINFO, SCOPUS, CINAHL were searched (May 2019). Records on the development of instruments and studies assessing content validity or structural validity of falls efficacy related scales were included. COSMIN methodology was used to guide the review of eligible studies and in the assessment of their methodological quality. Evidence of content validity: relevance, comprehensiveness and comprehensibility and unidimensionality for structural validity were synthesised. A modified GRADE approach was applied to evidence synthesis. Results: Thirty-five studies, of which 18 instruments had been identified, were included in the review. High-quality evidence showed that the Modified Falls Efficacy Scale (FES)-13 items (MFES-13) has sufficient relevance, yet insufficient comprehensiveness for measuring falls efficacy. Moderate quality evidence supported that the FES-10 has sufficient relevance, and MFES-14 has sufficient comprehensibility. Activities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale–Simplified (ABC-15) has sufficient relevance in measuring balance confidence supported by moderate-quality evidence. Low to very low-quality evidence underpinned the content validity of other instruments. High-quality evidence supported sufficient unidimensionality for eight instruments (FES-10, MFES-14, ABC-6, ABC-15, ABC-16, Iconographical FES (Icon-FES), FES–International (FES-I) and Perceived Ability to Prevent and Manage Fall Risks (PAPMFR)). Conclusion: Content validity of instruments to measure falls efficacy is understudied. Structural validity is sufficient for a number of widely-used instruments. Measuring balance confidence is a subset of falls efficacy. Further work is needed to investigate a broader construct for falls efficacy.

Falls efficacy: The self-efficacy concept for falls prevention and management

Background: A near-fall is defined as a loss of balance that would result in a fall if sufficient balance recovery manoeuvres are not executed. Compared to falls, near-falls and its associated balance recovery manoeuvres have been understudied. Older adults may not recognise a near-fall or identify the use of their balance recovery manoeuvres to prevent a fall. The consensus on the methods to collect near-fall data is lacking. The primary objective of this study was to determine the feasibility of recruitment and retention. Secondary objectives were to establish evidence that Singapore community-dwelling older adults can identify near-falls and associated balance recovery manoeuvres. Texting and calling methods were explored as reporting methods. Methods: This study took place in Singapore (September to October 2019). Participants were healthy, community-dwelling adults aged 65 or older. Recruitment was done through poster advertisement, and all participants gave informed consent. Participants attended a briefing session and reported their near-fall or fall incidence over 21 days using either daily texting or calling. The primary outcome measures were the recruitment rate, retention rate, preferred modes for data reporting and ability to report near-falls or falls. Secondary outcomes included the self-reported incidence of falls and near-falls. Results: Thirty older adults were recruited in 5 weeks. All participants completed the study. They understood near-fall concepts and were able to report the occurrence and relevant balance recovery manoeuvres used to prevent a fall. 87% (26/30) chose to text while 13% (4/30) selected calling as their reporting method. One actual fall (0.16%) out of 630 responses was reported. Thirty-six incidents (5.7%) of near-falls were recorded. Sixteen participants (53.3%) experienced near-falls and half of this group experienced two or more near-falls. The use of reach-to-grasp strategy (36%), compensatory stepping (52.8%), and other body regions (11.2%) were used to prevent the fall. Conclusions: The study provided evidence that studying near-falls in Singapore community-dwelling older adults is feasible and can be applied to a large-scale study. Recruitment and retention rates were good. Older adults were able to identify near-falls and balance recovery manoeuvres. Both texting and calling were feasible reporting methods, but texting was preferred. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials identifier: NCT04087551. Registered on September 12, 2019

Falls efficacy posits an understanding of the perceived ability to prevent and manage falls. There have been no validated self-reported instruments to measure the perceived ability to recover balan...