title: Understanding, comprehensibility and acceptance of an evidence-based consumer information brochure on fall prevention in old age: a focus group study.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Evidence-based patient and consumer information (EBPI) is an indispensable component of the patients' decision making process in health care. Prevention of accidental falls in the elderly has gained a lot of public interest during preceding years. Several consumer information brochures on fall prevention have been published; however, none fulfilled the criteria of an EBPI. Little is known about the reception of EBPI by seniors. Therefore we aimed to evaluate a recently developed EBPI brochure on fall prevention with regard to seniors' acceptance and comprehensibility in focus groups and to explore whether the participants' judgements differed depending on the educational background of the study participants.
  
  
  METHODS
  Seven focus groups were conducted with 40 seniors, aged 60 years or older living independently in a community. Participants were recruited by two gatekeepers. A discussion guide was used and seniors were asked to judge the EBPI brochure on fall prevention using a Likert scale 1-6. The focus group discussions were tape recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed using content analysis.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The participants generally accepted the EBPI brochure on fall prevention. Several participants expressed a need for more practical advice. The comprehensibility of the brochure was influenced positively by brief chapter summaries. Participants dismissed the statistical illustrations such as confidence intervals or a Fagan nomogram and only half of them agreed with the meta-information presented in the first chapter. The detailed information about fall prevalence was criticised by some seniors. The use of a case story was well tolerated by the majority of participants.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Our findings indicate that the recently developed EBPI brochure on fall prevention in old age was generally well accepted by seniors, but some statistical descriptions were difficult for them to understand. The brochure has to be updated. However, not all issues raised by the participants will be taken into account since some of them are contrary to the principles of EBPI.
authors: University of Witten/Herdecke, Stockumer Straße 12, Witten, Germany.
authors: Sabine
authors: S
authors: Lins
authors: Andrea
authors: A
authors: Icks
authors: Gabriele
authors: G
authors: Meyer
references: Health Expect. 2007 Mar;10(1):46-61
references: 17324194
references: Age Ageing. 2001 Nov;30(6):473-6
references: 11742775
references: Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1998 Spring;14(2):212-25
references: 9611898
references: Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2007 Nov;8(2):53-96
references: 26161749
references: BMJ. 1995 Jul 29;311(7000):299-302
references: 7633241
references: Public Health Nurs. 2006 May-Jun;23(3):216-23
references: 16684199
references: JAMA. 2007 Jan 3;297(1):77-86
references: 17200478
references: Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich. 2005;99(6):343-51
references: 16121649
references: Patient Educ Couns. 2006 Jul;62(1):56-63
references: 16098706
references: Pflege. 2010 Aug;23(4):267-74
references: 20687039
references: J Gen Intern Med. 2009 Dec;24(12):1336-7
references: 19798537
references: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Jul 08;(3):CD001431
references: 19588325
references: BMJ. 2004 Jan 17;328(7432):148
references: 14726344
references: Ger Med Sci. 2007 Aug 27;5:Doc05
references: 19675713
references: Patient Educ Couns. 2010 Mar;78(3):316-28
references: 20005067
references: Ger Med Sci. 2007 Jan 11;5:Doc01
references: 19675709
references: J Am Geriatr Soc. 2010 Jan;58(1):70-5
references: 20002505
references: Health Expect. 2007 Sep;10(3):248-58
references: 17678513
references: J Risk Res. 2008;11(8):983-997
references: 19169420
references: Patient Educ Couns. 2007 Dec;69(1-3):145-57
references: 17942268