Conectar
To examine the reasons for and methods of using remote video monitoring to prevent falls across hospital and residential aged care, and explore how staff, patients, residents and families perceive its use and benefits.
Scoping Review.
Following JBI methodology, eight databases were searched in July 2025 with no date restrictions. Two reviewers independently screened studies using predefined criteria, and one reviewer extracted data. Narrative and thematic syntheses described how video monitoring is implemented for falls prevention and explored stakeholders' attitudes.
Thirty-five studies were included, with 77% conducted in hospitals and 86% focusing on staff perspectives, highlighting a critical underrepresentation of patients/residents and families. Perceived effectiveness was shaped by underlying motivations—falls prevention, workforce optimisation, or cost reduction. Attitudes were influenced by workload impacts, video monitoring knowledge, ethical and liability concerns. Three remote video monitoring models were identified: technician-based, automated alerts, and nurse-observed without alerts. Technician-based systems were only in hospitals, with no equivalent in aged care.
Research on remote video monitoring for falls prevention is heavily weighted towards hospitals and staff perspectives. Nurses generally viewed video monitoring as effective but still preferred in-person observers. Although there is interest in innovative monitoring systems in aged care that balance safety with a homelike environment, empirical research is lacking. Patient, resident, and family experiences remain underrepresented and require further research.
Remote video monitoring has emerged as an alternative to mobilisation alarms, given their uncertain effectiveness and negative consequences for patients and nurses. Much U.S. hospital research reflects a cost-reduction paradigm aimed at replacing in-person observers, a trend not seen internationally or in aged care. This research is relevant to decision-makers considering technological options for falls prevention and to nurse leaders seeking insight into the appeal and apprehension surrounding video monitoring.
PRISMA-ScR.
None.
To review current evidence on the implementation and impact of virtual nursing care in long-term aged care.
An integrative rapid literature review.
Medline, CINAHL, Web of Science, Embase, Ageline and Scopus.
The review included studies involving virtual care interventions provided by nurses (or by a multidisciplinary team including nurses) to older people in residential aged care that reported health outcomes or stakeholder experiences. Consistent with PRISMA guidelines, databases were systematically searched in July and August 2024, focusing on literature published since 2014. Studies were screened in Covidence by three team members, with conflicts resolved by additional reviewers. Studies not involving nurses or not set in aged care were excluded.
The search identified 13 studies, which included quantitative, qualitative and mixed-method approaches, conducted in both Australian and international settings, as well as in rural and metropolitan locations. Nurses were often involved as part of an existing virtual care programme, typically located in a hospital setting. The training and credentials of nurses delivering VN varied in terms of specialisation and advanced practice. The model of care in general was ad hoc, though in some cases there were regular, scheduled VN consultations. The time requirements for onsite staff and nurses were not well articulated in any of the studies, and information on the funding models used was also lacking.
There is some evidence that VN interventions in aged care may improve communication, enhance person-centred care and reduce emergency department presentations and hospitalisations.
Rigorous, ongoing evaluation of VN interventions is required to ensure their appropriate application in residential aged care.
To explore why and how staff use alarms for falls prevention in hospital and their alignment to person-centred practice.
Qualitative interpretive design.
One hundred focus groups and 25 interviews across 10 health services were completed between October 2022 and September 2024. Participants included nurses (n = 451), allied health (n = 82), and fall prevention managers (n = 18). The Framework Method guided initial data familiarisation and analysis and led to the Person-Centred Practice Framework being identified as a useful framework.
Themes generated: (1) Understaffed, under-resourced, under pressure, (2) Alarm impact on stress and workload, (3) Negotiating patient safety and patient preference, (4) Engaging family as a resource, (5) Sharing responsibility for alarms and falls prevention, and (6) Navigating ambiguity and fearing consequences.
Staff feel compelled to use alarms despite problems associated with their use and challenges to person-centred practice. Drivers of alarm use were feeling under-resourced and fearing liability if patients fell. Staff want clearer organisational guidance in alarm use but also want the freedom to use their own clinical reasoning.
Hospitals worldwide are working to identify effective strategies for preventing falls. However, research has yet to adequately explore the perspectives of frontline nurses and allied health staff regarding the use of mobilisation alarms—a critical gap when evaluating their impact and effectiveness. This study's six key themes provide insights into why alarms are so widely used despite the limited evidence supporting their effectiveness.
Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research.
This study did not include patient or public involvement in its design, conduct, or reporting.
Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12621000823875.
Hospital falls persist as a major threat to patient safety. This study aimed to develop an interprofessional reference standard to prevent, manage and report hospital falls.
A Delphi consensus methodology, informed by the Conducting and Reporting Delphi Studies guideline, was used to design the reference standard. An interprofessional expert panel (n=47) of health professionals, researchers, policymakers and consumers participated in three Delphi rounds. Following the review of clinical guidelines, an e-Delphi survey was developed and piloted to derive 60 initial items for the standard. Two iterative rounds of e-Delphi surveys were distributed via Research Electronic Data Capture and included free-text questions and 9-point Likert scales. An online consensus meeting followed, to ratify the final standard.
In the first Delphi round, there was over 80% agreement for 44/60 items to be included in the reference standard. This increased to 48/60 items in Round 2. At the final consensus meeting, 12 items still did not reach consensus for inclusion and one was added, yielding 49 items. Items that replicated text according to falls with injury/without injury were combined, resulting in 42 items in the final reference standard. Agreed items included: (1) brief screening of falls risk on hospital admission; (2) comprehensive falls assessment for inpatients who are older, frailer or have complex conditions; (3) single interventions (such as environmental adaptations and exercise); (4) multifactorial interventions; (5) education of patients, families and staff; (6) optimising local falls hospital policies, procedures and leadership capability; (7) optimising documentation and reporting; (8) improving accreditation processes; (9) workforce redesign to augment falls education. Items that did not reach agreement (n=12) pertained to alarms, bed rails, grip socks, artificial intelligence, volunteers and care bundles.
This new reference standard provides a checklist for staff, patients, managers and policymakers to reduce unwanted variations in prevention, management and reporting of hospital falls.
ANZCTR 386960
To estimate the direction and magnitude of socioeconomic inequalities in outcome, experience and care among adults consulting for a musculoskeletal pain condition.
Multicentre, prospective observational cohort with repeated measures at three waves (baseline, 3 months and 6 months after index consultation).
30 general practices in North Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent, England.
1875 consecutive, eligible, consenting patients, aged 18 years and over, presenting with a relevant SNOMED CT-coded musculoskeletal pain condition between September 2021 and July 2022.
Standard care.
Primary outcome was patient-reported pain and function using the Musculoskeletal Health Questionnaire (MSK-HQ score, 0–56). Secondary outcomes were patient experience (overall dissatisfaction with consultation experience, dichotomised) and an indicator of care received (opioid prescription within 14 days of index consultation). Using multilevel models, we examined inequalities in primary and secondary outcomes by area deprivation (Index of Multiple Deprivation derived from patient residential postcode), before and after adjusting for sociodemographic and survey administration variables, clinical case-mix and selected practice-level covariates.
Compared with patients from the least deprived neighbourhoods, patients from the most deprived neighbourhoods had significantly poorer MSK-HQ scores at baseline (mean 22.6 (SD 10.4) vs 27.6 (10.1)). At 6 months, the inequality gap in MSK-HQ score widened (difference in mean score after adjustment for all covariates: 1.94; 95% CI: –0.70 to 4.58). Opioid prescription was more common for patients living in the most deprived neighbourhoods (30% vs 19%; fully adjusted OR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.44 to 1.08). Only 6% of patients overall reported being dissatisfied with their consultation. Analysis of multiply imputed data produced a similar pattern of findings to complete-case analysis.
Substantial inequalities in the chronicity, severity and complexity of musculoskeletal pain problems are already present at the time of accessing care. Inequalities in pain and function do not reduce after accessing care and may even widen slightly.
ISRCTN18132064; Results.
FreshRSS 