Résumé Introduction. Cette étude évaluait l'impact d'un atelier équilibre en hôpital de jour gériatrique sur la prévention des chutes chez le sujet âgé. Méthode. Il s'agissait d'une étude prospective et monocentrique. Des tests moteurs ont été réalisés ainsi qu'un bilan psychologique à 2 mois (M2), à 6 mois (M6) et à 1 an (M12). Résultats. Soixante-cinq patients ont été inclus, d'âge moyen de 82,0 ans, dont 58 femmes. Il existait une amélioration significative des différents tests moteurs durant le suivi. La durée du Timed Up and Go (s), passait de 19,1 ± 8,2 à l'inclusion, à 15,8 ± 6,6 à M2 (P = 0,01 ), à 16,4 ± 6,9 à M6 (P = 0,04 inclusion vs M6) et à 16,3 ± 6,4 à M12 (P = 0,04 inclusion vs M12). Il existait aussi une amélioration psychologique significative. Le score à l'échelle Falls Efficacy Scale International-I passait de 11,6 ± 6,1 à l'inclusion à 8,2 ± 5,5 à M2 (P = 0,001), à 9,2 ± 6,0 à M6 (P = 0,02 inclusion vs M6) et à 9,0 ± 6,1 à M12 (P = 0,02 inclusion vs M12).
Conclusion: Cette étude souligne l'intérêt des ateliers équilibre en soins primaires. Abstract Introduction. Falls are a major public health problem as a result of the high frequency of these events and morbidity/mortality among elderly persons. A prevention policy is a potential means to reduce the incidence of falls. This study aimed to assess the impact of a balance workshop in a geriatric day-hospital (GDH) on the prevention of falls in olderadults.
Method: This was a prospective, single centre study conducted in the GDH of a general hospital. Motor tests and a psychological assessment were performed at 2 months (M2), 6 months (M6)and 1 year (M12).
Results: Sixty-five patients were included, aged 82.0 ± 7.7 years. Fifty-eight were women (89.2%). The statistical analyses showed a significant improvement in all motor tests during the follow-up at the defined intervals. The Timed Up and Go test (s) significantly decreased between inclusion, 19.1 ± 8.2, and M2, 15.8 ± 6.6 (P = 0.01 inclusion vs M2), then was stable at M6, 16.4 ± 6.9 (P = 0.04 inclusion vs M6) and at M12, 16.3 ± 6.4 (P = 0.04 inclusion vs M12). There was also significant psychological improvement throughout follow-up. The score on the Falls Efficacy Scale International-I decreased from 11.6 ± 6.1 at inclusion to 8.2 ± 5.5 at M2 (P = 0.001 inclusion vs. M2), 9.2 ± 6.0 at M6 (P = 0.02 inclusion vs. M6), and 9.0 ± 6.1 at M12 (P = 0.02 inclusion vs. M12).
Conclusion: This study highlights the value and the need for balancing workshops in primary care.