Technology Supported Improvement, Management and Prevention of Accidental Falls in Hospitals (TechSIMPAFiH)

January 12, 2026 updated by: University of Nottingham
The student will observe fall prevention systems in practice in 2 different hospitals considering how fall prevention technology influences staff behaviour and patients safety in the context of accidental falls in hospital. Accidental falls in hospital are rare but can be life changing for those that suffer them as they are often frail patients who are already vulnerable. Current research shows little improvement with any interventions tested which leaves patient facing clinicians with few resources to assist in the prevention of falls. The investigator believes this is because the measure of accidental falls in hospital is not sensitive enough to calibrate for the different contexts in which patients fall. The student would posit that it is the context that is most influential and addressing the context may lead to improved measures so progress can be made in finding solutions.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Not yet recruiting

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Detailed Description

The multi-centre study will involve up to 2 wards on each of the 2 Trust sites. The study wards will be randomly selected from a group of wards that have indicated they are happy to be considered as potential research wards. An ethnographic case study with contextual enquiry design will be used to allow a contextual analysis of fall prevention in practice and consider how staff decisions and behaviour contribute to this. Hierarchical task analysis (HTA) will be utilised to inform this and to identify differences between 'work as imagined' compared to 'work as done' . The study will use observations of the staff in clinical practice using their current system of fall prevention measures assisted by their existing technology and will illustrate outcomes with specific and transparent definitions. Calculations of falls occurring measured with local live data will compare with current standard measurements (Falls/1000 occupied bed days) as calculated with central occupancy data. The ward team, patients and relatives attending the wards will have an opportunity to complete a questionnaire about the use of fall prevention technology advertised in the ward environment on fliers and posters as permitted by policy. Recommendations for future technology design, research and use of technology in fall prevention will be provided on conclusion of the study.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Observational

Enrollment (Estimated)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
200

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Contact

Study Contact

The name and contact information for the person who can answer enrollment questions for a clinical study. Each location where the study is being conducted may also have a specific contact, who may be better able to answer those questions.

Study Contact Backup

Study Locations

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sampling Method

Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

Healthcare professionals working as a clinical team in practice

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Any member of the ward team as defined by the ward manager including students. All healthcare professional groups, ancillary and administrative staff who work on the selected study ward and any temporary staff from agency or other wards who consent to participate.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Any staff under 18 years old

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

Cohorts and Interventions

Group / Cohort

Group / Cohort

A group or subgroup of participants in an observational study that is assessed for biomedical or health outcomes.
clinical ward team UHL1
A clinical ward team in a NHS acute care Trust
clinical ward team UHL2
A clinical ward team in a NHS acute care Trust

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
To discover how work practice and behaviour adheres or varies from policy
Time Frame: 12 months
Data will be gathered by observing staff in their usual work environment over a 12 month period to determine how fall prevention practice is shaped by technology. Up to 200 staff will be observed by the researcher on various shifts. Hierarchical task analysis will be used to compare how work varies from the policy/protocol and any workarounds that have been developed (Work as done will be compared to work as imagined). Adherence to policy/protocol or variance from policy/protocol will be recorded and collated as a count of deviations.
12 months
To collate evidence of the context of falls in a context log to identify potential contributory factors to accidental falls in hospital.
Time Frame: 12 months
A thematic analysis of accidental fall incident forms will be undertaken comparing contextual details at the time of the accidental fall to identify common themes. Previously uncollated facts such as the exact location of fall (bedside or bathroom), lighting at the time and ability to alter the lighting (automatic switch on /off versus dimmer switch), footwear (own or provided in hospital) and whether walking aids in place or not etc. These will be compared before the implementation of fall prevention alarms versus after implementation to see if the implementation of fall prevention alarms has impacted on falls in any specific contextual category. This will identify if there is a specific context in which fall prevention alarms prevents falls. This will allow more accurate measurement of success of technology as there may be a specific type of fall that can be prevented by the technology.
12 months
To discover how accidental falls are being measured and recorded in hospital by observation and comparing live data measurement against standard data measurement.
Time Frame: 12 months
The current way of calculating falls/1000 bed days is flawed. Occupancy rate and number of admissions are not considered. The outcome will compare standard falls/1000 OBD's versus a contextual measurement that better represents outcomes. Instead of taking average hospital occupancy data the calculation of the number of falls/1000 occupied bed days will be calculated using actual data from ward level occupancy. If the hospital uses an electronically generated occupancy measurement it can give falsely high measurements of falls on a specific ward as it reports empty beds at midnight. These empty beds at midnight are often an electronic delayed transfer rather than actual empty beds. measurement according to stafff reported figures will be compared.
12 months

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
To identify through thematic analysis using Nvivo 15 task critical attributes and user requirements for future fall prevention technology design
Time Frame: 12 months
The observation of the use of technology in practice will provide themes where practice is impeded or enhanced by the use of technology. This will be identified by the themes identified during observation of staff. These themes will be analysed and recommendations for future fall prevention alarms will be deduced.
12 months
Staff interviews
Time Frame: 12 months
Staff will be questioned during their shift with 'go along questions' (quick questions in between work tasks) to record their rationale for completing fall prevention tasks in the way they have. Answers will be anonymously recorded to provide themes to be analysed using Nvivo 15.
12 months

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
University of Nottingham

Collaborators

Collaborators

An organization other than the sponsor that provides support for a clinical study. This support may include activities related to funding, design, implementation, data analysis, or reporting.
Northern Care Alliance NHS Foundation Trust
University Hospitals, Leicester

Investigators

Investigators

A researcher involved in a clinical study. Related terms include site principal investigator, site sub-investigator, study chair, study director, and study principal investigator.
  • Principal Investigator: James Reid, University Hospitals, Leicester

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Estimated)

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
April 1, 2026

Primary Completion (Estimated)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
March 31, 2027

Study Completion (Estimated)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
March 31, 2027

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
November 14, 2025

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
January 12, 2026

First Posted (Actual)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
January 21, 2026

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
January 21, 2026

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
January 12, 2026

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
October 1, 2025

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • 25057

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

UNDECIDED

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings