Skip to main content

Table 5 Quality of life scores of the participants with and without a fall during follow-up

From: Cost-utility of medication withdrawal in older fallers: results from the improving medication prescribing to reduce risk of FALLs (IMPROveFALL) trial

Fall Group N Baseline Follow-up p-values* Change p-values**
EQ-5D utility score Control 87 0.71 ± 0.25 0.64 ± 0.28 0.01 −0.07 ± 0.29 0.13
  Intervention 101 0.68 ± 0.29 0.67 ± 0.28 0.70 −0.01 ± 0.27  
SF-12 PCS score Control 88 44.0 ± 10.4 39.3 ± 13.1 <0.01 −4.7 ± 9.8 0.72
  Intervention 107 44.8 ± 9.5 40.7 ± 11.2 <0.01 −4.2 ± 10.2  
SF-12 MCS score Control 88 53.6 ± 9.1 51.6 ± 10.5 0.14 −1.9 ± 10.8 0.56
  Intervention 107 52.4 ± 10.6 51.7 ± 9.2 0.25 −1.0 ± 11.1  
No fall Group N Baseline Follow-up p-values* Change p-values**
EQ-5D utility score Control 169 0.81 ± 0.19 0.80 ± 0.22 0.27 −0.02 ± 0.16 0.08
  Intervention 180 0.77 ± 0.24 0.80 ± 0.23 0.44 0.02 ± 0.16  
SF-12 PCS score Control 172 47.3 ± 9.6 43.9 ± 10.4 <0.01 −3.5 ± 7.8 0.01
  Intervention 178 46.1 ± 9.6 44.5 ± 10.2 <0.01 −1.5 ± 7.1  
SF-12 MCS score Control 172 53.1 ± 9.0 53.0 ± 8.5 0.76 −0.1 ± 9.2 0.46
  Intervention 178 53.9 ± 8.8 53.0 ± 8.9 0.40 −0.9 ± 8.8  
  1. C control, I intervention. Data are given as mean values ± standard deviation
  2. *Wilcoxon Signed Rank test
  3. **Two-way ANOVA