Why is cost analysis of falls important for doctors in tertiary hospitals?

Medical Advisory BoardAll articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board
Educational purpose only • Exercise caution as content is pending human review
Article Review Status
Submitted
Under Review
Approved

Last updated: October 19, 2025View editorial policy

Personalize

Help us tailor your experience

Which best describes you? Your choice helps us use language that's most understandable for you.

Cost Analysis of Falls: Importance for Doctors in Tertiary Hospitals

Cost analysis of falls is critical for doctors in tertiary hospitals because health services are investing considerable resources—estimated at AU$46 million annually across six health services in Australia (potentially AU$590 million nationally)—in fall prevention activities that may not be evidence-based or cost-effective. 1

Economic Impact of Falls in Hospitals

  • Falls represent one of the most frequently occurring adverse events affecting older hospital inpatients, threatening both immediate and longer-term health outcomes and independence 2
  • The short-term cost to a health service for a single cognitively intact patient who falls can be as high as AU$14,591 (2008 values), highlighting the significant financial burden falls place on hospital systems 2
  • Medical costs increase proportionally with the degree of injury sustained, with third-degree injuries incurring the highest post-fall medical costs (averaging 18,257 New Taiwan dollars per patient) 3

Resource Allocation Concerns

  • Current resource allocation for falls prevention shows significant variability across health services, with major resources being consumed by:
    • Physiotherapy services (18%)
    • Continuous patient observers (14%)
    • Falls assessments and screens (12%)
    • Falls prevention alarms (11%) 1
  • Many of these resource-intensive activities have weak or little evidence of effectiveness, suggesting potential opportunities for more strategic resource allocation 1

Cost-Effectiveness of Targeted Interventions

  • Targeted interventions based on accurate risk assessment can be more cost-effective than universal approaches:
    • A multimedia patient education program with trained health professional follow-up cost A$526 (2008) to prevent one cognitively intact patient from falling 2
    • This program showed a 52% probability of being both more effective and less costly than usual care alone 2
    • When the proportion of cognitively intact patients falling under usual care is at least 4%, providing targeted education programs can both prevent falls and reduce costs 2

Impact on Length of Stay and Hospital Resources

  • Patients who fall during hospitalization typically have significantly longer lengths of stay compared to matched non-fallers, particularly in high-risk diagnostic groups such as those with delirium, stroke, and respiratory conditions 4
  • Hospital-related costs are substantially higher for fallers compared to non-fallers, especially for patients with stroke with severe/complicating diagnosis/procedure 4
  • Effective screening using clinical judgment (such as physiotherapist assessment) can reduce falls by approximately 2.2 fallers per 100 inpatients and reduce resources spent on prevention and treatment by AU$2,704 per 100 inpatients compared to no intervention 5

Practical Implications for Doctors

  • Understanding the cost implications of falls enables doctors to advocate for evidence-based prevention strategies that are both clinically effective and economically sound 1, 2
  • Doctors should prioritize fall prevention activities for high-risk diagnostic groups where the economic impact of falls is greatest 4
  • Resources currently allocated to potentially ineffective strategies could be redirected to interventions with stronger evidence bases, such as structured patient education programs 1
  • Accurate risk assessment using clinical judgment can improve the cost-effectiveness of targeted interventions 5

Common Pitfalls to Avoid

  • Investing in falls prevention equipment and strategies without evidence of effectiveness wastes valuable healthcare resources 1
  • Failing to consider the cost-effectiveness of interventions may lead to suboptimal resource allocation 2
  • Not targeting high-risk patient groups (such as those with dementia, delirium, or stroke) misses opportunities for significant cost savings 4
  • Overlooking the potential for disinvestment in ineffective strategies prevents reallocation of resources to more effective interventions 1

Professional Medical Disclaimer

This information is intended for healthcare professionals. Any medical decision-making should rely on clinical judgment and independently verified information. The content provided herein does not replace professional discretion and should be considered supplementary to established clinical guidelines. Healthcare providers should verify all information against primary literature and current practice standards before application in patient care. Dr.Oracle assumes no liability for clinical decisions based on this content.

Have a follow-up question?

Our Medical A.I. is used by practicing medical doctors at top research institutions around the world. Ask any follow up question and get world-class guideline-backed answers instantly.