Abstract
Background Assessing fall risk is a complex process requiring the integration of diverse information and cognitive strategies. Despite this complexity, few studies have explored how nurses make these judgements. Moreover, existing research suggests variability in nurses’ fall risk assessments, but the reasons for this variation and its appropriateness remain unclear.
Objective This study aimed to investigate how nurses judge fall risk, and the factors associated with their judgements.
Methods Using purposive sampling, 335 nurses from six hospitals in western Japan participated in an online survey. The participants rated the likelihood of falls in 18 patient scenarios and completed measures of base-rate neglect, belief bias, and availability bias. A linear mixed-effects regression tree was used to identify factors related to their judgements, and a linear mixed-effects regression model examined associations between judgement variability, cognitive biases, and clinical specialty.
Results Nurses’ fall risk assessments were primarily influenced by whether patients called for assistance, followed by the use of sleeping pills, the presence of a tube or drain, and patient mobility status. Judgement variability was linked to nurses’ gender, education, clinical specialty, and susceptibility to availability bias.
Conclusion Variability in clinical judgement may be justified when reflecting personalised, context-specific care. However, inconsistencies arising from cognitive biases are problematic. Healthcare organisations should offer targeted training to enhance contextual expertise and reduce the influence of cognitive biases on fall risk assessments.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was supported by JSPS KAKENHI [grant Numbers 22K10749].
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Approval was obtained from Yasuda Women's University Ethics Commitee (Approval No: 240006 Kan Gaku).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
There are some typo errors, which have been corrected.
