Number 392 + September 21, 2007

Fall Injury Episodes Among Noninstitutionalized Older

Adults: United States, 2001–2003

by Jeannine S. Schiller, M.P.H.; Ellen A. Kramarow, Ph.D.; and Achintya N. Dey, M.A.

Division of Health Interview Statistics and Office of Analysis and Epidemiology

Abstract

Objective—This report presents national estimates of fall injury episodes for

noninstitutionalized U.S. adults aged 65 years and over, by selected characteristics.

Circumstances surrounding the fall injury and activity limitations and utilization of

health care resulting from the fall injury are also presented.

Methods—Combined data from the 2001–2003 National Health Interview

Surveys (NHIS), conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s

National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), were analyzed to produce estimates

for the U.S. civilian noninstitutionalized population. Data on nonfatal medically

attended fall injuries occurring within the 3 months preceding the interview were

obtained from an adult family member.

Results—The annualized rate of fall injury episodes for noninstitutionalized

adults aged 65 years and over in 2001–2003 was 51 episodes per 1,000 population.

Rates of fall injuries increased with age, and were higher for women compared with

men. Non-Hispanic white older adults had higher rates of fall injuries compared

with non-Hispanic black older adults. Older adults with certain chronic conditions

and activity limitations had higher rates of fall injuries compared with older adults

without these conditions. The most common cause of fall injuries among older

adults was slipping, tripping, or stumbling, and most fall injuries occurred inside or

around the outside of the home. Nearly 60 percent of older adults who experienced

a fall injury visited an emergency room for treatment or advice. Nearly one-third of

older adults experiencing a fall injury needed help with activities of daily living as

a result, and over one-half of these persons expected to need this help for at least 6

months. A similar percentage experienced limitation in instrumental activities of

daily living as a result of fall injuries.

Conclusion—Fall injuries remain very prevalent among older adults and result

in high health care utilization and activity limitations. Rates of fall injuries vary by

demographic and health characteristics of older noninstitutionalized adults.

Keywords: National Health Interview Survey c injury episodes c injury prevention c

older adults

Introduction

Falls are the leading cause of

nonfatal medically attended injuries in

the United States (1). Injuries caused by

falls are more prevalent among adults

aged 65 years and over compared with

younger persons, occurring in 2005 at a

rate of 76 episodes per 1,000 population

among persons aged 65 years and over

and 36 episodes per 1,000 population

among persons under age 65 (CDC

unpublished data, 2005). Annually, one

in three Americans over age 65 years

experiences a fall, and many of these

falls are recurrent (2,3). Falls are

associated with numerous morbidities,

decreased quality of life, and high health

care costs (4–6). Physical injuries

associated with falling include fractures,

contusions, and lacerations. Hip and

other lower extremity fractures can be

especially debilitating for older adults

(7–9). Studies have shown that injuries

experienced as a result of falling may

lead to a decrease in the ability to

perform activities of daily living (10,11).

Especially among older adults, falls

increase disability, and those injured

during a fall often do not return to their

pre-fall level of physical functioning

(12).

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

National Center for Health Statistics 
2 Advance Data No. 392 + September 21, 2007

Aside from the physical injuries and

limitations that often result from a fall,

there are psychological consequences of

experiencing a fall injury. Studies have

shown that a fall injury may trigger the

fear of additional falls (13,14). Such

fears or the inability to recover pre-fall

physical functions may lead to increased

depressive symptoms, including fear of

institutionalization (15). A study of

adults aged 75 years and over found that

those adults who fell at least once

during the past 3 months had an

increased risk of being admitted to a

long-term care facility over a 1 year

period (16). Ultimately, the fear of

another fall may lead to decreases in

quality of life, due to restricting usual

activities in hopes of avoiding a fall.

There is considerable health care

utilization resulting from fall injuries. In

2003, over 1.8 million older adults were

treated in emergency departments for

fall injuries, and over 421,000 were

hospitalized (17). Among older adults,

fall injuries were five times as likely to

be the cause of hospitalization compared

with injuries due to other causes (18).

Due to this high usage of health care

services, costs associated with fall

injuries are very high for this age group.

For example, among older adults, the

total cost of fall injuries was $27.3

billion in 1994, and this cost is expected

to increase to $43.8 billion by 2020

(5,19).

Increases in life expectancy during

the past century have contributed to

increases in the size of the older

population, and this trend is expected to

continue. According to the U.S. Census

Bureau, by 2020, the population aged 65

years and over will reach 54.6 million,

up from 35.0 million in 2000 (20).

Because the prevalence of fall injuries is

high among older adults, it is desirable

to examine the demographic and health

characteristics of those who have

experienced a recent fall injury. It is

also of interest to assess causes and

consequences of the fall injury. This

information will help target prevention

strategies and identify health care

utilization needs for older adults who

may be at higher risks for fall injuries

as well as identify possible adverse

outcomes resulting from fall injuries.

This report presents national

estimates of nonfatal medically attended

fall injury episodes for noninstitutionalized adults aged 65 years and over

based on data from the National Health

Interview Survey (NHIS) for 2001–

2003. The NHIS is one of the major

data collection systems of the National

Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) and

is a continuous survey of a nationally

representative sample of the U.S.

civilian noninstitutionalized household

population. NHIS microdata are released

annually. In this report, estimates are

presented by demographic characteristics, such as sex, age, race/ethnicity,

poverty status, place of residence and

region, as well as selected health

characteristics including chronic

conditions, activity limitations, and

health behaviors. This report also

presents descriptive statistics about the

type of fall injury, activity during fall

injury, location of the fall injury, and

health care contacts and limitations

experienced as a result of the fall injury.

Methods

Data source

The statistics shown in this report

are based on data from the family and

sample adult components of the

2001–2003 NHIS annual core

questionnaires (21–23). As previously

noted, the NHIS is a survey of a

nationally representative sample of the

civilian noninstitutionalized household

population of the United States.

Individuals residing in long-term care

institutions or correctional facilities are

excluded from the sample, as well as

those on active duty in the Armed

Services (although their civilian family

members are included) and U.S.

nationals living in foreign countries.

Basic health and demographic

information is collected in the family

component for all members of the

family. Adults present at the time of the

interview are asked to respond for

themselves. Proxy responses are

accepted for the family component for

adults not present at the time of the

interview and for those who are

physically or mentally incapable of

responding for themselves. Additional

information is collected from one

randomly selected adult and child (the

‘‘sample adult’’ and ‘‘sample child’’) per

family. The sample adult responds for

himself or herself, and a knowledgeable

adult in the family provides proxy

responses for the sample child. In rare

instances, when the sample adult is

mentally or physically incapable of

responding, proxy responses are

accepted for this person.

Data on nonfatal medically attended

injuries and poisonings (collectively

referred to as ‘‘injuries’’) occurring in

the previous 3-month period to any

member of the family residing in the

home at the time of the interview are

obtained using the family component.

Respondents are asked if during the past

3 months (or 91 days before the

interview date) they or anyone in the

family was injured or poisoned seriously

enough that they got medical advice or

treatment. The focus of the injury and

poisoning section is on episodes. An

episode is defined as a traumatic event

in which the person was injured one or

more times from an external cause. The

International Classification of Diseases,

Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification

(ICD–9–CM) is used to define injuries

and classify external causes of injury

conditions (24). A person may record up

to a total of 10 episodes and will be

represented in the data file as many

times as he or she had unique episodes.

Each episode must have at least one

condition classified according to the

nature-of-injury codes 800–999 in the

ICD–9–CM. Medically attended injuries

are defined as those for which a health

care professional was contacted either in

person or by telephone for advice or

treatment. Additional information

available for each episode includes the

cause of the injury, what the person was

doing at the time of the injury, the place

of occurrence, whether the person was

hospitalized, where the injured person

received medical advice or treatment,

and whether the injury caused any

limitation of activity. Information about

how the injury happened, the body part

injured, the type of injury, along with

responses to questions about specific

types of injuries, place of occurrence,

and activity were used to assign

ICD–9–CM diagnostic and external
Advance Data No. 392 + September 21, 2007 3

cause codes for all injuries. More details

on injury data in the NHIS since the

latest survey redesign in 1997 can be

found in Injury and Poisoning Episodes

and Conditions: National Health

Interview Survey, 1997 (25).

Statistical analysis

Three years of data were combined

to obtain sufficient sample sizes for

subgroup analyses. Differences in injury

questions on the NHIS prior to 2001

prevented analysis of earlier data for

this study. The interviewed sample for

2001–2003 consisted of 111,014

households, which yielded 113,037

families and 286,294 persons (of which

31,875 were aged 65 years and over).

For the combined years 2001–2003, the

household response rate was 89.2%. The

final response rate for the Sample Adult

component was 74.1%. Procedures used

in calculating response rates for

combined NHIS data years are described

in detail in Appendix I of the Survey

Description of the NHIS data files

(21–23). This report is based on 524 fall

injury episodes among 31,875 adults

aged 65 years and over (unweighted

counts). Of those who fell, 93% of these

older adults had only one fall injury

episode reported during the 3-month

recall period.

Data from the NHIS can be used to

estimate the number and rate of fall

injuries in the noninstitutionalized

population. Because the recall period for

injury episodes is 3 months, each

3-month estimate was multiplied by 4 to

calculate estimates of the number of

injury episodes occurring annually.

Rates are calculated as the annual

number of fall injury episodes per 1,000

population. However, it is not possible

to estimate the number of people injured

annually using the NHIS. Although the

number of persons who were injured

during the 3-month recall period is

known, the same individuals may or

may not have had comparable numbers

of additional episodes over the rest of

the year (25). Recent research suggests

that when studying all injuries (or minor

injuries), it may be preferable to base

estimates on injuries occurring within 5

weeks before the interview rather than

on all injuries occurring within the

3-month recall period used in the NHIS

(26). Beginning with the 2004 NHIS,

imputation is performed at NCHS for

injury episode dates for which the

respondent had not provided sufficient

information to determine a month, day,

and year of occurrence. Imputation was

done so that for all episodes it would be

possible to calculate a specific elapsed

time in days between the date of the

injury episode and the date the injury

questions were asked. The availability of

this information will allow for use of a

five-week reference period (or any

desired reference period less than or

equal to the three-month recall period).

Point estimates and estimates of

their variances were calculated using

SUDAAN, a software package that is

designed to account for a complex

sample design such as that used by the

NHIS. The Taylor series linearization

method was selected for variance

estimation (27). All estimates were

calculated using NHIS weights that are

based on census totals for sex, age, and

race/ethnicity of the civilian noninstitutionalized population of the United

States. Estimates based on variables

from the family component (Tables 1

and 3–6) were weighted using the

Person Record Weights, while estimates

based on variables in the sample adult

component (Table 2) were weighted

using the Sample Adult Record Weights.

Due to sampling variability, overall rates

of fall injuries calculated using the two

different sets of weights are slightly

different. All estimates shown meet the

NCHS standard of having less than or

equal to 30% relative standard error.

Some estimates presented in this

report were age adjusted using the 2000

projected U.S. population as the

standard population (28,29). The

SUDAAN procedures DESCRIPT and

RATIO were used to produce ageadjusted estimates. Age adjustment was

used to allow comparison of various

sociodemographic subgroups that have

different age structures. The estimates in

this report that were age adjusted used

the age groups 65–74 years, 75–84

years, and 85 years and over.

Estimates were compared using

two-tailed significance tests at the 0.05

level. Terms such as ‘‘greater than’’ and

’’less than’’ indicate a statistically

significant difference. Terms such as

’’similar’’ or ’’no difference’’ indicate

that the statistics being compared were

not significantly different. Lack of

comment regarding the difference

between any two statistics does not

mean that the difference was tested and

found to be not significant.

Most statistics presented in this

report can be replicated using NHIS

public-use data files and accompanying

documentation available for downloading from the NCHS website at

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhis.htm. Many

of the references cited in this report are

also available via the NCHS website at

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs.

Results

Figure 1 shows rates of fall injury

episodes for persons of all ages and

shows that for adults, these rates

increase considerably with age. Table 1

presents frequencies and rates of fall

injury episodes by various characteristics. The annual crude rate of fall

injury episodes for adults aged 65 years

and over based on the 2001–2003 NHIS

was 51 episodes per 1,000 population

per year. Adults aged 85 years and over

had the highest rates of fall injury

episodes, and rates were similar among

men and women. However, among

adults aged 65–74 years and 75–84

years, the rate of fall injury episodes

was higher in females than in males

(65–74 years: 39 and 25 per 1,000

population, respectively; 75–84 years:

80 and 43 per 1,000 population,

respectively). Among older adults,

non-Hispanic whites had higher

age-adjusted rates of fall injury episodes

than non-Hispanic blacks (53 and 34 per

1,000 population, respectively). Fall

injury episode rates for Hispanics (51

per 1,000 population), were similar to

rates for non-Hispanic whites. Fall

injury episode rates (age-adjusted) were

lower for older adults who were married

or living with a partner compared with

their widowed, never married, divorced,

or separated counterparts (40 and 66 per

1,000 population, respectively). Older

adults who had fair or poor health status

had higher rates (age-adjusted) of fall

injury episodes compared with older

adults with excellent or very good (78
4 Advance Data No. 392 + September 21, 2007

Frequencies and age-adjusted rates

of fall injury episodes are presented for

70 

60 selected health characteristics in Table 2.

The rate of fall injury episodes was

50 higher among adults aged 65 years and

over with heart disease, stroke, cancer, 40 diabetes, or vision problems compared

with adults without these conditions. 30 

Fall injury episode rates for older adults

did not vary significantly by obesity,

alcohol consumption, hypertension, or

20 

10 asthma. Older adults who had great

difficulty (responding ‘‘very difficult to

0 do’’ or ‘‘can’t do at all’’) walking 0-11 12-17 18-44 45-64 65-74 75-84 85 years one-quarter of a mile, standing for two and over 

Age group hours, stooping, or climbing 10 steps

DATA SOURCE: National Health Interview Surveys, 2001 2003. Estimates are based on household interviews of a sample of without resting had significantly higher -

and 36 per 1,000 population, 100 respectively) or good health status (46

per 1,000 population). There were no 90 

significant differences in fall injury

episode rates by metropolitan statistical 80 

area status or region of residence.

Rate per 1,000 population 

the civilian noninstitutionalized population. 

Figure 1. Annualized rates of fall injury episodes among persons of all ages, by age

group: United States, 2001–2003

40


35


30


25


Other1

Percent 

rates of fall injury episodes compared

with adults who found those activities

either not at all difficult, only a little

difficult, or somewhat difficult. Fall

injury episode rates for older adults

whose health was better or the same

compared to last year were lower

compared with older adults whose

health was worse compared to last year.

Circumstances surrounding fall

injuries of older adults are shown in

Tables 3–5 and Figure 2. The causes of

fall injuries are presented in Table 3.

Fifty-seven percent of the fall injury

episodes occurred due to slipping,

20 

15 

10 

5 

0 

Working Unpaid Leisure Sleeping, 

around work activity resting, eating, 

the house or cooking 

or yard 

1“Other" includes the following categories: unspecified, driving or riding in a motor vehicle, working at a paid job, attending 

tripping, or stumbling. The next highest

cause of fall injuries was loss of

balance, dizziness, fainting, or a seizure

(27%). The majority of fall injuries

occurred at home (Table 4). Nearly

three-quarters of the fall injury episodes

occurred at home, either inside the

house (50%) or around the outside of

the house (24%). The remaining

one-quarter of the fall injury episodes

occurred in locations including streets,

parking lots, residential institutions,

public buildings, recreation areas,

schools, industrial areas, etc. Over

school, and being care for.


NOTE: Respondents could indicate participation in up to two activities per fall injury episode.


one-half of the fall injury episodes

among older adults happened on the DATA SOURCE: National Health Interview Surveys, 2001 2003. Estimates are based on household interviews of a sample - of 

the civilian noninstitutionalized population. floor or level ground (Table 5). Sixteen

percent of the fall injury episodes

Figure 2. Percentages of fall injury episodes among adults aged 65 years and over, by occurred on either stairs or an escalator, activity when fall injury occurred: United States, 2001–2003 followed by curbs and furniture (8% for
Advance Data No. 392 + September 21, 2007 5

both types). Twenty-nine percent of fall

injury episodes occurred while the older

adult was working around the house or

yard, and over 20% of the episodes

occurred while engaged in leisure

activities (Figure 2). Smaller percentages

of fall injury episodes occurred while

doing unpaid work (6%) or activities

such as sleeping, eating, resting, or

cooking (9%).

Fall injuries among older adults

resulted in activity limitations and

varying levels of health care utilization

(Table 6). Six percent of fall injury

episodes among older adults resulted in

a phone call to a doctor for treatment or

advice. Nearly 40% of the episodes led

to a doctor’s office visit, while 8% led

to an outpatient clinic visit, and 57%

resulted in a visit to an emergency

room. Thirty-two percent of fall injury

episodes caused a need for help with

activities of daily living, and for over

one-half of these episodes, this help was

expected to be needed for at least 6

months. The same percentage of fall

injury episodes (32%) resulted in a need

for help with instrumental activities of

daily living, and almost three-quarters of

these episodes were expected to require

this help for at least 6 months.

Discussion

Based on this study, adults aged 65

years and over in the noninstitutionalized U.S. population experienced

51 fall injury episodes per 1,000

population per year or approximately 1.7

million fall injury episodes annually.

Fall injury episode frequencies and rates

based on the NHIS were somewhat

lower than those obtained using another

NCHS survey, the National Hospital

Ambulatory Medical Care Survey

(NHAMCS) (30). The NHAMCS

includes only data on fall injuries that

resulted in a visit to a hospital

emergency department (ED). Differences

in these estimates between the surveys

could be explained by several factors.

The NHIS is a household interview

survey and the NHAMCS is based on

provider medical records. The NHIS

does not capture all fall injury episodes

if the respondent does not recall them, a

problem that may be more prevalent

among older adults with memory

problems, leading to a possible

underestimation of events (31). The

populations for these surveys are also

different. The NHIS fall injury data are

not limited to ED visits, while the

NHAMCS estimates are limited to ED

visits only. In addition, the NHIS does

not include institutionalized persons in

its sample, while the NHAMCS includes

both institutionalized and noninstitutionalized persons. A strength of the

NHIS is that it captures additional fall

injury episodes that result in medical

attention other than emergency

department visits. The NHIS, however,

is not designed to cover injuries

experienced by institutionalized persons.

In 2002, 5% of the total U.S. population

aged 65 years and over was

institutionalized, but this number

increases to 17% for adults aged 85

years and over (32). Consequently, fall

injuries among the very old are less

likely to be covered by the NHIS.

In making comparisons to other

surveys, it is important to consider that

use of a 5-week reference period may

lead to more accurate reports of some

types of injuries, including fall injuries.

Research based on the 1997–1999 NHIS

shows that injuries occurring during the

5 weeks preceding the interview were

more likely to be reported than those

occurring 6–13 weeks before the

interview. These differences are seen

more for less severe injuries such as

contusions and superficial injuries

compared with severe injuries such as

fractures (26). Because fall injuries can

be either minor or severe, it would be

desirable to use the 5-week reference

period when possible. Preliminary

analyses of 2004–2005 NHIS data show

that regardless of whether the 3-month

recall period or 5-week reference period

was used, overall fall injury episode

rates for older adults increased

compared with 2001–2003 rates.

Findings that older women are more

likely to experience a fall injury than

older men and that fall injuries increase

with age among older adults were

consistent with the NHAMCS and other

studies (30,33–35). One explanation of

the higher rates of fall injury episodes

among older women is they experience

a substantial loss of bone density

following menopause, a factor that may

increase the likelihood of experiencing a

fall (19). Our study found that nonHispanic white older adults were more

likely to experience a fall injury

compared with non-Hispanic black

adults. This finding was consistent with

a study based on hospitalized Californians aged 20 years and over that

indicated that whites were more likely

to have experienced fall injuries

compared with blacks and Hispanics

(36). Based on our study, older adults

who were either married or cohabiting

had lower rates of fall injuries compared

with adults who were divorced,

separated, widowed, or who had never

married. This finding is consistent with

a similar finding from a Finnish study

that found that unmarried marital status

was a significant predictor of major

injurious falls (37). The higher rate of

fall injuries among older adults who are

not married or not living with a partner

may be related to the older adult

engaging in physically demanding

activities that exceed their abilities in

order to maintain independence, but that

increase their likelihood of falling (37).

Numerous studies have investigated

the association between health characteristics and falls or fall injuries. A

Proceedings based on two symposia on

the prevention of falls summarizes the

results of 52 studies that examined risk

factors for falls and/or fall injuries from

1976–1994 (38), and more recent studies

have examined health char- acteristics as

well (37,39–50). Consistent with other

studies that have found that declining

self-reported health status is associated

with falls (45,49,51), our study found

that rates of fall injury episodes for

older adults were higher among persons

with fair or poor health status compared

with good, very good, or excellent

health status. Older adults with heart

disease, stroke, cancer, diabetes, or

vision problems were also more likely

to experience a fall injury. Previous

studies have found that heart disease

(47), stroke (47), and vision problems

(41,45) may be risk factors for falls or

fall injuries. These chronic conditions

may increase susceptibility to falls by

way of altering sensory or motor

systems. Medications taken to control

these types of chronic conditions may

also increase the likelihood of falls (42).
6 Advance Data No. 392 + September 21, 2007

Persons with diabetes may have a higher

prevalence of neuropathy or impaired

gait or balance, which could lead to an

increased risk for falls (50). Vision

problems can increase the likelihood of

a fall by decreasing the ability to detect

obstacles and lessening stability (37).

Older adults with selected severe

mobility limitations also experienced

higher rates of fall injury episodes

compared with older adults with little or

no difficulty with these activities.

Although it cannot be determined

whether or not these limitations

occurred as a result of the fall injury or

whether they were a factor in causing

the injury, it is interesting to note that

previous studies found limitations in

walking (46) and stepping (40) to be

risk factors of falls in the older

population. Inconsistent with this

analysis, several studies have found that

low body mass index is associated with

an increased risk of falls due to

underweight persons being weak or

having poor nutritional or health status

(52–54). One reason for this result may

be the omission of institutionalized older

adults from the NHIS. These adults may

be weaker or in poorer health than their

noninstitutionalized counterparts. Other

health characteristics were considered,

but not included in the analysis due to

sample size limitations.

Several circumstances surrounding

fall injuries of older adults were

investigated. Slipping, tripping, or

stumbling was found to be the most

common cause of fall injury among

older adults, followed by loss of

balance, dizziness, fainting, or seizure.

The majority of fall injuries occurred

inside or around the home, and over

one-half of fall injuries occurred on the

floor or level ground. Nearly 3 out of 10

fall injuries occurred while the older

adult was working around the house or

yard. The finding that home was the

most common site of a fall injury was

consistent with other studies of older

adults (36,55–57). Different studies did

not always categorize causes of falls,

types of falls, and activities during

which the fall occurred in exactly the

same manner as our study, but these

studies still found that slipping or

tripping and loss of balance were

common causes of fall injuries among

older adults (36,45,58). Other studies

also found that the floor or level ground

as well as stairs or steps were common

types of falls, which was consistent with

this study (36,59). Results from this

study indicate that fall injuries result in

various types of health care utilization

and chronic activity limitations. A

previous study found that among older

adults with at least one activity

limitation, older adults with fall injuries

had a higher likelihood of needing help

with bathing, dressing, using the

bathroom, and eating compared with

older adults not experiencing a fall (60).

A limitation of this study is that,

because the NHIS is a cross-sectional

survey, causality between various

characteristics and fall injuries cannot be

ascertained unless a question asks a

respondent if it was the result of the

injury. Additionally, despite combining

data from multiple data years, sample

sizes for older adults who experienced a

fall injury are still relatively small and

therefore constrained the analysis of

some characteristics found to be

associated with falls or fall injuries in

other studies. As previously mentioned,

length of the recall period could have

led to underreporting of less severe

injuries, and reluctance on the part of

respondents to answer detailed questions

about injuries could also result in

underreporting of injuries.

Even with its limitations, this study

is valuable in presenting nationally

representative results of analyses based

on older adults experiencing a fall

injury. Combining 3 years of NHIS data

provided reliable estimates of fall injury

rates, and the wide variety of health

topics on the NHIS allowed for

identification of several characteristics

that may contribute to the likelihood of

experiencing a fall injury or result from

experiencing a fall injury. In addition to

these strengths, NHIS provides details

surrounding the circumstance of fall

injuries not often found in other

large-scale surveys.

References

1. Adams PF, Dey AN, Vickerie JL.

Summary health statistics for the

U.S. population: National Health

Interview Survey, 2005. Vital Health

Stat 10(233):1–104. 2007.

2. Nevitt MC, Cummings SR, Kidd S,

Black D. Risk factors for recurrent

nonsyncopal falls. A prospective

study. JAMA 261(18):2663–8. 1989.

3. Tinetti ME, Speechley M, Ginter SF.

Risk factors for falls among elderly

persons living in the community. N

Engl J Med 319(26):1701–7. 1988.

4. Campbell AJ, Borrie MJ, Spears GF,

Jackson SL, Brown JS, Fitzgerald JL.

Circumstances and consequences of

falls experienced by a community

population 70 years and over during

a prospective study. Age Ageing

19(2):136–41. 1990.

5. Englander F, Hodson TJ, Terregrossa

RA. Economic dimensions of slip

and fall injuries. J Forensic Sci

41(5):733–46. 1996.

6. Hill K, Schwarz J, Flicker L, Carroll

S. Falls among healthy, communitydwelling, older women: a prospective

study of frequency, circumstances,

consequences and prediction

accuracy. Aust N Z J Public Health

23(1):41–8. 1999.

7. Grisso JA, Kelsey JL, Strom BL et

al. Risk factors for falls as a cause of

hip fracture in women. The Northeast

Hip Fracture Study Group. N Engl J

Med 324(19):1326–31. 1991.

8. Hall SE, Williams JA, Senior JA,

Goldswain PR, Criddle RA. Hip

fracture outcomes: quality of life and

functional status in older adults

living in the community. Aust N Z J

Med 30(3):327–32. 2000.

9. Wolinsky FD, Fitzgerald JF, Stump

TE. The effect of hip fracture on

mortality, hospitalization, and

functional status: a prospective study.

Am J Public Health 87(3):398–403.

1997.

10. Kosorok MR, Omenn GS, Diehr P,

Koepsell TD, Patrick DL. Restricted

activity days among older adults. Am

J Public Health 82(9):1263–7. 1992.

11. Tinetti ME, Williams CS. The effect

of falls and fall injuries on

functioning in community-dwelling

older persons. J Gerontol A Biol Sci

Med Sci 53(2):M112–M119. 1998.

12. Scaf-Klomp W, van Sonderen E,

Sanderman R, Ormel J, Kempen GI.

Recovery of physical function after

limb injuries in independent older

people living at home. Age Ageing

30(3):213–9. 2001.

13. Maki BE, Holliday PJ, Topper AK.

Fear of falling and postural
Advance Data No. 392 + September 21, 2007 7

performance in the elderly. J

Gerontol 46(4):M123–M131. 1991.

14. Tinetti ME, Mendes de Leon CF,

Doucette JT, Baker DI. Fear of

falling and fall-related efficacy in

relationship to functioning among

community-living elders. J Gerontol

49(3):M140–M147. 1994.

15. Scaf-Klomp W, Sanderman R, Ormel

J, Kempen GI. Depression in older

people after fall-related injuries: a

prospective study. Age and Ageing

32(1):88–94. 2003.

16. Donald IP, Bulpitt CJ. The prognosis

of falls in elderly people living at

home. Age Ageing 28(2):121–5.

1999.

17. Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention. Web-based Injury

Statistics Query and Reporting

System (WISQARS). National Center

for Injury Prevention and Control,

Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention. 2005.

18. Alexander BH, Rivara FP, Wolf ME.

The cost and frequency of

hospitalization for fall-related injuries

in older adults. Am J Public Health

82(7):1020–3. 1992.

19. Stevens JA, Sogolow ED. Gender

differences for non-fatal unintentional

fall related injuries among older

adults. Inj Prev 11(2):115–9. 2005.

20. U.S. Census Bureau. Statistical

Abstract of the United States, 2006.

Washington. 2006.

21. National Center for Health Statistics.

National Health Interview Survey

(NHIS). Public Use Data Release.

National Center for Health Statistics.

2001.

22. National Center for Health Statistics.

National Health Interview Survey

(NHIS). Public Use Data Release.

National Center for Health Statistics.

2002.

23. National Center for Health Statistics.

National Health Interview Survey

(NHIS). Public Use Data Release.

National Center for Health Statistics.

2003.

24. Public Health Service and Health

Care Financing Administration.

International Classification of

Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical

Modification. Washington. 1991.

25. Warner M, Barnes PM, Fingerhut

LA. Injury and poisoning episodes

and conditions: National Health

Interview Survey, 1997. Vital Health

Stat 10 (202):1–38. 2000.

26. Warner M, Schenker N, Heinen MA,

Fingerhut LA. The effects of recall

on reporting injury and poisoning

episodes in the National Health

Interview Survey. Inj Prev

11(5):282–7. 2005.

27. Research Triangle Institue. SUDAAN

Language Manual, Release 9.0.

Research Triangle Park, NC. 2004.

28. Day JC. Population projections of the

United States by age, sex, race, and

Hispanic origin: 1995 to 2050, U.S.

Bureau of the Census. Washington.

1996.

29. Klein RJ, Schoenborn CA. Age

adjustment using the 2000 projected

U.S. population. Healthy People

2000 Stat Notes (20):1–9. 2001.

30. National Center for Health Statistics.

Health, United States, 2005 With

Chartbook on Trends in the Health of

Americans, Table 89. Hyattsville,

MD. 2005.

31. Cummings SR, Nevitt MC, Kidd S.

Forgetting falls. The limited accuracy

of recall of falls in the elderly. J Am

Geriatr Soc 36(7):613–6. 1988.

32. Federal Interagency Forum on

Aging-Related Statistics. Older

Americans 2004. Washington, DC.

2004.

33. Campbell AJ, Spears GF, Borrie MJ.

Examination by logistic regression

modelling of the variables which

increase the relative risk of elderly

women falling compared to elderly

men. J Clin Epidemiol 43(12):1415–

20. 1990.

34. Peel NM, Kassulke DJ, McClure RJ.

Population based study of

hospitalised fall related injuries in

older people. Inj Prev 8(4):280–3.

2002.

35. Ryynänen OP, Kivela SL, Honkanen

R, Laippala P, Soini P. Incidence of

falling injuries leading to medical

treatment in the elderly. Public

Health 105(5):373–86. 1991.

36. Ellis AA, Trent RB. Do the risks and

consequences of hospitalized fall

injuries among older adults in

California vary by type of fall? J

Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci

56(11):M686–M692. 2001.

37. Koski K. Risk factors for major

injurious falls among the homedwelling elderly by functional

abilities. A prospective populationbased study. Gerontology

international journal of experimental

and clinical gerontology 44(4):232–8.

1998.

38. Myers AH, Young Y, Langlois JA.

Prevention of falls in the elderly.

Bone 18(1 Suppl):87S–101S. 1996.

39. Arfken CL, Wilson JG, Aronson SM.

Retrospective review of selective

serotonin reuptake inhibitors and

falling in older nursing home

residents. Int Psychogeriatr 13(1):85–

91. 2001.

40. Clark RD, Lord SR, Webster IW.

Clinical parameters associated with

falls in an elderly population.

Gerontology 39(2):117–23. 1993.

41. Cwikel J. Falls among elderly people

living at home: medical and social

factors in a national sample. Isr J

Med Sci 28(7):446–53. 1992.

42. Isaacs B. Are falls a manifestation of

brain failure? Age Ageing Suppl

97–111. 1978.

43. Kallin K, Jensen J, Olsson LL,

Nyberg L, Gustafson Y. Why the

elderly fall in residential care

facilities, and suggested remedies. J

Fam Pract 53(1):41–52. 2004.

44. Kutner NG, Schechtman KB, Ory

MG, Baker DI. Older adults’

perceptions of their health and

functioning in relation to sleep

disturbance, falling, and urinary

incontinence. FICSIT Group. J Am

Geriatr Soc 42(7):757–62. 1994.

45. Lord SR, Ward JA, Williams P,

Anstey KJ. An epidemiological study

of falls in older community-dwelling

women: the Randwick falls and

fractures study. Aust J Public Health

17(3):240–5. 1993.

46. O’Loughlin JL, Robitaille Y, Boivin

JF, Suissa S. Incidence of and risk

factors for falls and injurious falls

among the community-dwelling

elderly. Am J Epidemiol 137(3):342–

54. 1993.

47. Prudham D, Evans JG. Factors

associated with falls in the elderly: a

community study. Age Ageing

10(3):141–6. 1981.

48. Ryynänen OP, Kivela SL, Honkanen

R, Laippala P. Recurrent elderly

fallers. Scand J Prim Health Care

10(4):277–83. 1992.

49. Teno J, Kiel DP, Mor V. Multiple

stumbles: a risk factor for falls in

community-dwelling elderly. A

prospective study. J Am Geriatr Soc

38(12):1321–5. 1990.

50. Volpato S, Blaum C, Resnick H,

Ferrucci L, Fried LP, Guralnik JM.

Comorbidities and impairments

explaining the association between

diabetes and lower extremity

disability: The Women’s Health and

Aging Study. Diabetes Care

25(4):678–83. 2002.
8 Advance Data No. 392 + September 21, 2007

51. Ryynänen OP. Health, functional

capacity, health behaviour,

psychosocial factors and falling in

old age. Public Health 108(2):99–

110. 1994.

52. Dunn JE, Rudberg MA, Furner SE,

Cassel CK. Mortality, disability, and

falls in older persons: the role of

underlying disease and disability. Am

J Public Health 82(3):395–400. 1992.

53. Herndon JG, Helmick CG, Sattin

RW, Stevens JA, DeVito C, Wingo

PA. Chronic medical conditions and

risk of fall injury events at home in

older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc

45(6):739–43. 1997.

54. Tinetti ME, Doucette J, Claus E,

Marottoli R. Risk factors for serious

injury during falls by older persons

in the community. J Am Geriatr Soc

43(11):1214–21. 1995.

55. Allander E, Gullberg B, Johnell O,

Kanis JA, Ranstam J, Elffors L.

Circumstances around the fall in a

multinational hip fracture risk study:

a diverse pattern for prevention.

MEDOS Study Group).

Mediterranean Osteoporosis Study.

Accid Anal Prev 30(5):607–16. 1998.

56. Cali CM, Kiel DP. An epidemiologic

study of fall-related fractures among

institutionalized older people. J Am

Geriatr Soc 43(12):1336–40. 1995.

57. Norton R, Campbell AJ, Lee-Joe T,

Robinson E, Butler M.

Circumstances of falls resulting in

hip fractures among older people. J

Am Geriatr Soc 45(9):1108–12.

1997.

58. Talbot LA, Musiol RJ, Witham EK,

Metter EJ. Falls in young, middleaged and older community dwelling

adults: perceived cause,

environmental factors and injury.

BMC Public Health 586. 2005.

59. Roudsari BS, Ebel BE, Corso PS,

Molinari NA, Koepsell TD. The

acute medical care costs of fallrelated injuries among the U.S. older

adults. Injury 36(11):1316–22. 2005.

60. Stevens JA, Powell KE, Smith SM,

Wingo PA, Sattin RW. Physical

activity, functional limitations, and

the risk of fall-related fractures in

community-dwelling elderly. Ann

Epidemiol 7(1):54–61. 1997.
Advance Data No. 392 + September 21, 2007 9

Table 1. Annualized frequencies and age-adjusted annualized rates of fall injury episodes among adults aged 65 years and over, by

selected characteristics: United States, 2001–2003

Number in Rate per 1,000 population

Characteristic thousands (95% confidence interval)

Sex and age1

Both sexes:

65 years and over (age adjusted) ................................ 1,689 51.55 (45.82 57.27)

65 years and over (crude)..................................... 1,689 50.56 (44.89 56.24)

65–74 years ............................................ 585 32.70 (26.26 39.13)

75–84 years ............................................ 790 65.37 (55.68 75.07)

85 years and over ........................................ 313 91.85 (68.32 115.39)

Male:

65 years and over ......................................... 524 39.65 (31.21 48.10)

65–74 years ............................................ 202 24.83 (16.84 32.81)

75–84 years ............................................ 211 43.35 (30.18 56.51)

85 years and over ........................................ 110 92.13 (45.66 138.60)

Female:

65 years and over ......................................... 1,165 60.26 (51.75 68.77)

65–74 years ............................................ 383 39.28 (29.42 49.14)

75–84 years ............................................ 579 80.28 (65.86 94.69)

85 years and over ........................................ 203 91.70 (64.92 118.48)

Hispanic or Latino origin and race2

Hispanic or Latino.......................................... 99 51.05 (28.68 73.42)

Not Hispanic or Latino white, single race ........................... 1,458 53.48 (46.98 59.98)

Not Hispanic or Latino black or African American, single race ............... 92 34.06 (18.04 50.09)

Non-Hispanic, other ........................................ 28 *29.92 ( 8.56 51.29)

Marital status

Never married, divorced, separated, or widowed ....................... 990 66.12 (56.29 75.96)

Married or cohabiting........................................ 686 39.56 (32.33 46.79)

Poverty status3

Poor .................................................. 242 65.55 (43.26 87.83)

Near Poor .............................................. 493 53.57 (39.87 67.26)

Not poor ............................................... 954 48.53 (40.75 56.30)

Place of residence4

Large MSA .............................................. 708 51.00 (42.47 59.53)

Small MSA .............................................. 603 52.41 (42.33 62.50)

Not in MSA.............................................. 377 50.96 (39.01 62.90)

Region

Northeast ............................................... 342 48.41 (35.41 61.40)

Midwest ................................................ 426 54.64 (43.28 65.99)

South ................................................. 549 47.41 (38.52 56.30)

West .................................................. 371 59.63 (45.08 74.18)

Respondent-assessed health status5

Excellent or very good ....................................... 448 36.40 (28.17 44.63)

Good ................................................. 532 45.57 (36.35 54.80)

Fair or poor.............................................. 708 78.08 (65.39 90.78)

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision. 1

Estimates for age groups are not age adjusted. 2

Persons of Hispanic or Latino origin may be of any race or combination of races. Similary, the category ‘‘not Hispanic or Latino’’ refers to all persons who are not of Hispanic or Latino origin,

regardless of race. 3

Poverty status is based on family income and family size using the U.S. Census Bureau’s poverty thresholds for 2000, 2001, and 2002. ‘‘Poor’’ persons are defined as below the poverty

threshold, ‘‘near poor’’ persons have incomes of 100% to less than 200% of the poverty threshold, and ‘‘not poor’’ persons have incomes that are 200% of the poverty threshold or greater. Missing

family income data were imputed for 36% of older adults. See ‘‘Technical Notes’’ on income. 4

MSA is metropolitan statistical area. 5

Respondent-assessed health status is based on the question ‘‘Would you say [person’s] health in general is excellent, very good, good, fair, or poor?’’

NOTE: Unless otherwise noted, estimates are age adjusted using the projected 2000 U.S. population as the standard population and using three age groups: 65–74 years, 75–84 years, and 85

years and over.

DATA SOURCE: National Health Interview Surveys, 2001–2003. Estimates are based on household interviews of a sample of the civilian noninstitutionalized population.
10 Advance Data No. 392 + September 21, 2007

Table 2. Annualized frequencies and age-adjusted annualized rates of fall injury episodes among adults aged 65 years and over, by

health characteristics: United States, 2001–2003

Number in Rate per 1,000 population

Characteristic thousands (95% confidence interval)

All fall injury episodes1....................................... 1,769 53.85 ( 45.41 62.29)

Heart disease2

Yes................................................... 733 67.37 ( 49.75 84.99)

No ................................................... 1,027 46.59 ( 37.34 55.84)

Hypertension3

Yes................................................... 986 53.72 ( 42.92 64.52)

No ................................................... 770 53.55 ( 39.92 67.18)

Stroke4

Yes................................................... 289 92.98 ( 54.81 131.14)

No ................................................... 1,472 50.13 ( 41.39 58.87)

Emphysema5

Yes................................................... 183 *115.09 ( 36.87 193.31)

No ................................................... 1,578 50.53 ( 42.56 58.50)

Asthma5

Yes................................................... 199 75.26 ( 38.93 111.60)

No ................................................... 1,554 51.59 ( 42.91 60.28)

Any cancer6

Yes................................................... 490 72.06 ( 53.41 90.72)

No ................................................... 1,279 49.15 ( 39.54 58.76)

Diabetes7

Yes................................................... 443 94.58 ( 55.63 133.53)

No ................................................... 1,320 48.39 ( 39.93 56.84)

Vision trouble8

Yes................................................... 528 84.12 ( 60.40 107.84)

No ................................................... 1,241 46.49 ( 38.07 54.90)

Difficulty walking a quarter of a mile

Not at all difficult .......................................... 647 35.12 ( 25.42 44.82)

Little or somewhat difficult..................................... 168 29.89 ( 15.91 43.87)

Very difficult or cannot do ..................................... 770 108.02 ( 84.05 131.99)

Difficulty standing for two hours

Not at all difficult .......................................... 521 31.75 ( 21.88 41.63)

Little or somewhat difficult..................................... 230 38.22 ( 21.57 54.86)

Very difficult or cannot do ..................................... 832 104.04 ( 81.75 126.33)

Difficulty stooping, bending, or kneeling

Not at all difficult .......................................... 491 30.32 ( 21.32 39.32)

Little or somewhat difficult..................................... 340 41.43 ( 26.37 56.50)

Very difficult or cannot do ..................................... 861 112.66 ( 88.12 137.19)

Difficulty climbing ten steps without resting

Not at all difficult .......................................... 650 31.30 ( 23.31 39.29)

Little or somewhat difficult..................................... 255 49.77 ( 30.21 69.33)

Very difficult or cannot do ..................................... 721 133.00 (102.04 163.95)

Body mass index9

Underweight or healthy weight .................................. 721 52.23 ( 38.61 65.85)

Overweight .............................................. 588 49.06 ( 36.15 61.97)

Obese ................................................. 410 72.39 ( 49.74 95.03)

Leisure-time physical activity10

Any regular.............................................. 308 43.56 ( 25.29 61.83)

No regular .............................................. 1,409 55.11 ( 45.42 64.81)

Alcohol consumption11

Nondrinker .............................................. 1,154 60.16 ( 48.41 71.91)

Current infrequent or light drinker ................................ 367 42.72 ( 28.48 56.97)

Current moderate or heavy drinker ............................... 202 46.75 ( 24.38 69.13)

Health status compared to last year12

Better or the same ......................................... 1,139 40.66 ( 33.11 48.22)

Worse ................................................. 624 122.55 ( 89.06 156.04)

* Figure does not meet standard of reliability or precision.
Advance Data No. 392 + September 21, 2007 11

1

Estimates in this table are calculated using Sample Adult weights, while other tables in this report use Person weights. Due to sampling variability, overall rates of fall injuries calculated using the

Sample Adult weights are slightly different than those calculated using the Person weights. 2

Respondents were asked if they had ever been told by a doctor or other health professional that they had any of the following conditions: coronary heart disease, angina pectoris, heart attack, or

any other heart condition or disease. 3

Respondents were asked ‘‘Have you ever been told by a doctor or other health professional that you had hypertension, also called high blood pressure?’’ 4

Respondents were asked ‘‘Have you ever been told by a doctor or other health professional that you had a stroke?’’ 5

Respondents were asked ‘‘Have you ever been told by a doctor or other health professional that you had asthma?’’ 6

Respondents were asked ‘‘Have you ever been told by a doctor or other health professional that you had cancer or a malignancy of any kind?’’ 7

Respondents were asked if they had ever been told by a doctor or other health professional that they had diabetes (or sugar diabetes; female respondents were instructed to exclude pregnancyrelated diabetes). Responses from persons who said they had ‘‘borderline’’ diabetes were treated as unknown with respect to diabetes. 8

Respondents were asked ‘‘Do you have any trouble seeing, even when wearing glasses or contact lenses?’’ 9

Body mass index (BMI) is calculated from information respondents supplied in response to questions in the survey regarding height and weight. For both men and women, underweight is

indicated by a BMI under 18.5; healthy weight is indicated by a BMI greater than or equal to 18.5 and less than 25.0; overweight is indicated by a BMI greater than or equal to 25.0 and less than

30.0; obesity is indicated by a BMI greater than or equal to 30.0. 10Regular leisure-time physical activity is defined as engaging in light-moderate leisure-time physical activity for greater than or equal to 30 minutes at a frequency of greater than or equal to five

times per week or engaging in vigorous leisure-time physical activity for greater than or equal to 20 minutes at a frequency greater than or equal to three times per week. 11Lifetime abstainers are defined as having had fewer than 12 drinks in their lifetime. A former drinker had at least 12 drinks in his or her lifetime or in any one year and had no drink in the past

year. Current infrequent drinkers are defined as having had at least 12 drinks in their lifetime, at least 12 drinks in one year, and 1–11 drinks in the past year. Current light drinkers are defined as

having had at least 12 drinks in their lifetime, at least 12 drinks in the past year, and less than or equal to three drinks per week in the past year. Current moderate drinkers are defined as having

had at least 12 drinks in their lifetime, at least 12 drinks in the past year, and (male) more than three drinks per week, up to 14 drinks per week, or (female) more than three drinks per week, up to

seven drinks per week. Current heavier drinkers are defined as having had at least 12 drinks in their lifetime, at least 12 drinks in the past year, and (male) over 14 drinks per week in the past

year, or (female) over seven drinks per week in the past year (average consumption). 12Estimates are based on the question ‘‘Compared with 12 months ago, would you say your health is better, worse, or about the same?’’

NOTE: Estimates are age adjusted using the projected 2000 U.S. population as the standard population and using three age groups: 65–74 years, 75–84 years, and 85 years and over.

DATA SOURCE: National Health Interview Surveys, 2001–2003. Estimates are based on household interviews of a sample of the civilian noninstitutionalized population.
12 Advance Data No. 392 + September 21, 2007

Table 3. Annualized frequencies and percentages of fall injury episodes among adults aged 65 years and over, by cause of fall:

United States, 2001–2003

Number in Percent of all fall episodes

Characteristic thousands (95% confidence interval)

All fall injury episodes ..................................... 1,689 100.0

Cause of fall

Slipping, tripping, or stumbling................................ 948 57.0 (51.5 62.5)

Loss of balance, dizziness, fainting, seizure ....................... 444 26.7 (21.6 31.7)

Other1 .............................................. 272 16.4 (12.1 20.7)

1

‘‘Other’’ includes the following categories: collision with, pushing, or shoving by another person; jumping or diving; and something else.

DATA SOURCE: National Health Interview Surveys, 2001–2003. Estimates are based on household interviews of a sample of the civilian noninstitutionalized population.

Table 4. Annualized frequencies and percentages of fall injury episodes among adults aged 65 years and over, by where fall occurred:

United States, 2001–2003

Number in Percent of all fall episodes

thousands (95% confidence interval)

All fall injury episodes ..................................... 1,689

Places mentioned where falls occurred1

Inside the house ........................................ 837 49.9 (44.7 55.1)

Outside the house ....................................... 400 23.9 (19.4 28.4)

Street, highway, or parking lot ................................ 110 6.5 ( 3.6 9.5)

Residential institution, health care facility, or other public building .......... 172 10.3 ( 7.2 13.4)

Other2 .............................................. 169 10.1 ( 7.2 13.0)

1

Respondents could indicate up to two places where the fall occurred per fall injury episode, therefore, the total percentage may be greater than 100%. 2

‘‘Other’’ includes the following categories: sport facility, athletic field, or playground; park or recreation area; river, lake, stream, or ocean; farm; industrial or construction area; trade or service

area; school; child care center or preschool; and other unspecified responses.

DATA SOURCE: National Health Interview Surveys, 2001–2003. Estimates are based on household interviews of a sample of the civilian noninstitutionalized population.

Table 5. Annualized frequencies and percentages of fall injury episodes among adults aged 65 years and over, by type of fall:

United States, 2001–2003

Number in Percent of all fall episodes

thousands (95% confidence interval)

All fall injury episodes ..................................... 1,689

Types of falls mentioned1

Stairs, steps, or escalator .................................. 260 15.5 (11.7 19.4)

Floor or level ground ..................................... 913 54.6 (49.3 59.8)

Curb, including sidewalk ................................... 136 8.1 ( 5.0 11.3)

Chair, bed, sofa, or other furniture ............................. 126 7.5 ( 4.6 10.5)

Other (specified)2 ....................................... 137 8.2 ( 5.3 11.1)

Other (not specified)...................................... 156 9.3 ( 6.3 12.3)

1

Respondents could indicate up to two types of falls per fall injury episdode, therefore, the total percentage may be greater than 100%. 2

‘‘Other (specified)’’ includes the following categories: ladder or scaffolding; playground equipment; building or other structure; bathtub, shower, toilet, or commode; and hole or other opening.

DATA SOURCE: National Health Interview Surveys, 2001–2003. Estimates are based on household interviews of a sample of the civilian noninstitutionalized population.
Advance Data No. 392 + September 21, 2007 13

Table 6. Annualized frequencies and percentages of fall injury episodes among adults aged 65 years and over, by consequences of fall

injury: United States, 2001–2003

Number in Percent of all fall episodes

Consequence1of fall injury thousands (95% confidence interval)

Phone call to doctor for treatment or advice .............................. 103 6.2 ( 3.8 8.6)

Visit to doctor’s office for treatment or advice.............................. 632 38.0 (32.7 43.3)

Visit to clinic or outpatient department for treatment or advice ................... 129 7.8 ( 5.1 10.4)

Visit to emergency room for treatment or advice ............................ 950 57.2 (52.2 62.1)

Overnight visit to hospital for treatment or advice ........................... 250 15.0 (11.1 18.9)

Need help with activities of daily living as result of fall injury .................... 532 31.8 (26.6 37.0)

Expect to need help with activities of daily living for at least six months2 .......... 278 58.5 (48.5 68.5)

Need help with instrumental activities of daily living as result of fall injury ............ 538 32.3 (27.2 37.4)

Expect to need help with instrumental activities of daily living for at least 6 months3 . . . 341 73.3 (64.2 82.3)

1

Consequences of fall injuries were asked in separate questions and are therefore not mutually exclusive. 2

The universe for these estimates is noninstitutionalized adults aged 65 years and over who needed help with activities of daily living as a result of the fall injury. 3

The universe for these estimates is noninstitutionalized adults aged 65 years and over who needed help with instrumental activities of daily living as a result of the fall injury.

DATA SOURCE: National Health Interview Surveys, 2001–2003. Estimates are based on household interviews of a sample of the civilian noninstitutionalized population.
14 Advance Data No. 392 + September 21, 2007

Technical Notes

Sample design

The National Health Interview

Survey (NHIS) is a cross-sectional

household interview survey of the U.S.

civilian noninstitutionalized population.

Data are collected continuously

throughout the year in all 50 states and

the District of Columbia. NHIS uses a

multistage, clustered sample design to

produce national estimates for a variety

of health indicators. Information on

basic health topics is collected for all

household members, if necessary, by

proxy from one adult family member.

Additional information is collected for

one randomly selected adult and one

randomly selected child in each family.

Self-response is required for the Sample

Adult questionnaire except in rare cases

where sample adults are physically or

mentally incapable of responding for

themselves.

Response rates

The household response rate for

NHIS data years 2001–2003 was 89.2%.

The final response rate for the Sample

Adult component of NHIS was 74.1%.

NHIS interviews were completed with

31,875 adults aged 65 years and over

completing the Family Core and 17,771

adults aged 65 years and over

completing the Sample Adult

questionnaires. Procedures used in

calculating response rates for combined

data years are described in detail in

Appendix I of the Survey Description

Document of the NHIS data files

(21–23).

Item nonresponse

Item nonresponse for each of the

sociodemographic indicators shown in

this report was about 1% or less, with

the exception of questions related to

family income. Because item nonresponse for family income (used to

generate estimates for poverty status)

was considerably higher than nonresponse for other indicators, starting

with 2004, family income data for NHIS

data was imputed with five sets of

imputed values created to allow for the

assessment of variability caused by

imputation. Family income was missing

for about 30% of persons in 2001–2003.

Detailed descriptions of the multiple

imputation procedure, as well as data

files for 1997 and beyond are available

from: www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhis.htm, via

the Imputed Income Files link under

that year. Item nonresponse for health

behavior, heath care, conditions, and

other health-related items were less than

3%. The denominators for estimates

shown in Tables 1–6 exclude persons for

whom the relevant information was not

reported.

Age adjustment

Data shown in this report were age

adjusted using the projected 2000 U.S.

population (provided by the U.S. Census

Bureau) as the standard population

(28,29). Age adjustment was used to

allow comparison among various

population subgroups that have different

age structures. This is particularly

important for demographic characteristics such as race and ethnicity,

education, and marital status. It is also

helpful for other characteristics. The

following age groups were used for age

adjustment: 65–74 years, 75–84 years,

and 85 years and over (Table I).

Estimates were calculated using

software for statistical analysis of

correlated data (SUDAAN) (27). The

SUDAAN procedures RATIO and

DESCRIPT were used to produce

age-adjusted percentages and rates and

their variances.

Table I. Age distribution used in age

adjusting data shown in Tables 1 and 2:

Projected 2000 U.S. population

Population

Age (in thousands)

65 years and over ........ 34,710

65–74 years .......... 18,136

75–84 years .......... 12,315

85 years and over ...... 4,259

Tests of significance

Statistical tests performed to assess

significance of differences in the

estimates were two-tailed with no

adjustments for multiple comparisons.

The test statistic used to determine

statistical significance of differences

between two percentages or rates was

|Xa–Xb|

Z = √Sa

2 + Sb2

where Xa and Xb are the two

percentages or rates being compared,

and Sa and Sb are the SUDAANcalculated standard errors of those

percentages or rates. The critical value

used for two-sided tests at the 0.05 level

of significance was 1.96.

Relative standard error

All estimates shown meet the

NCHS standard of having less than or

equal to 30% relative standard error.

The relative standard errors are

calculated as follows:

Relative standard error (as a percentage)

= (SE/Est) 100,

where SE is the standard error of the

estimate, and Est is the estimate.

Definition of terms

Socioemographic terms

Age—The age recorded for each

person is the age at the last birthday.

Hispanic or Latino origin and

race—Hispanic or Latino origin and

race are combined into a single measure

in this report. Anyone with any Hispanic

or Latino origin (including persons of

Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central

and South American, or Spanish origins)

were classified as Hispanic. The race

categories were limited to the two

largest single race groups due to issues

of statistical reliability with the smaller

groups. Data for single race persons

other than non-Hispanic black and

non-Hispanic white, and for multiple

race persons, though not shown

separately, are included in the analysis

for all other variables.

Marital status—For adults identified

in the initial household roster as spouses

or domestic partners, marital status is

automatically recorded and subsequently

verified by the interviewer. For all

others, respondents were asked to

choose one of six marital status

categories, displayed on a flash card,

that they felt best descried their current
Advance Data No. 392 + September 21, 2007 15

marital status (married, widowed,

separated, divorced, never married, or

living with a partner). Persons who were

living with a partner were considered

members of the same family. The

marital status ‘‘married’’ may include

common law unions.

Place of residence—Place of

residence is classified as inside a

metropolitan statistical area (MSA) or

outside an MSA. Generally, an MSA

consists of a county or group of

counties containing at least one city or

twin cities with a population of 50,000

or more, plus adjacent counties that are

metropolitan in character and are

economically and socially integrated

with the central city. In New England,

towns and cities rather than counties are

the units used in defining MSAs. The

number of adjacent counties included in

an MSA is not limited, and boundaries

may cross state lines. The metropolitan

populations in this report are based on

MSAs as defined in the 1990 census. In

the tables for this report, place of

residence is based on a variable in the

2003 Person data file indicating MSA

size. This variable is collapsed into three

categories: MSAs with a population of

1,000,000 or more, MSAs with a

population of less than 1,000,000, and

non-MSA areas.

Poverty status—Poverty status is

based on family income and family size

using the U.S. Census Bureau’s poverty

thresholds. ‘‘Poor’’ persons are defined

as below the poverty threshold. ‘‘Near

Poor’’ persons have incomes of 100% to

less than 200% of the poverty threshold.

‘‘Not Poor’’ persons have incomes that

are 200% of the poverty threshold or

greater.

Region—In the geographic

classification of the U.S. population,

states are grouped into the four regions

used by the U.S. Census Bureau:

Region States included

Northeast Maine, Vermont, New

Hampshire, Massachusetts,

Connecticut, Rhode Island,

New York, New Jersey, and

Pennsylvania;

Midwest Ohio, Illinois, Indiana,

Michigan, Wisconsin,

Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri,

North Dakota, South Dakota,

Kansas, and Nebraska;

South Delaware, Maryland, District

of Columbia, West Virginia,

Virginia, Kentucky,

Tennessee, North Carolina,

South Carolina, Georgia,

Florida, Alabama,

Mississippi, Louisiana,

Oklahoma, Arkansas, and

Texas;

West Washington, Oregon,

California, Nevada, New

Mexico, Arizona, Idaho,

Utah, Colorado, Montana,

Wyoming, Alaska, and

Hawaii.

Terms related to health

characteristics and outcomes

Conditions—Condition is a general

term that includes any specific illness

(physical or mental) or injury. From

1978 through 1996, six chronic

condition lists were used in the NHIS.

Those six lists covered 133 conditions.

The 1997 (and beyond) NHIS chronic

condition data cover a substantially

reduced number of conditions. Included

in this report were the following

conditions: heart disease, hypertension,

stroke, asthma, cancer, diabetes, and

vision trouble. All data in the Sample

Adult component are self-reported, and

most questions ask whether a condition

was diagnosed by a doctor or a health

professional. The reference periods for

the conditions vary. There are four basic

reference periods: ever, past 12 months,

past 30 days, and currently.

Respondent-assessed health

status—Respondent-assessed health

status was based on the question,

‘‘Would you say your health, in general,

was excellent, very good, good, fair, or

poor?’’ Information was obtained from

all respondents, with proxy responses

allowed for adults not taking part in the

interview.

Difficulty in physical functioning

—Refers to the degree of difficulty

respondents experienced performing

various physical activities without the

assistance of another person and without

using special equipment. Included in

this report were the following activities:

walking a quarter of a mile (or three

city blocks); standing for two hours;

stooping, bending or kneeling; and

climbing 10 steps without resting.

Response categories include ‘‘not at all

difficult,’’ ‘‘only a little difficult,’’

somewhat difficult,’’ ‘‘very difficult,’’

can’t do at all,’’ or ‘‘do not do this

activity.’’ Those who responded ‘‘do not

do this activity’’ were not included in

the tables.

Terms related to health behavior

Alcohol consumption— Refers to

the respondent’s alcohol drinking status

at the time of interview. There are six

alcohol consumption categories.

Lifetime abstainers are defined as

having had fewer than 12 drinks in his

or her lifetime. A former drinker had at

least 12 drinks in their lifetime or in any

one year and had no drink in the past

year. Current infrequent drinkers are

defined as having had at least 12 drinks

in their lifetime, at least 12 drinks in

one year, and 1–11 drinks in the past

year. Current light drinkers are defined

as having had at least 12 drinks in their

lifetime, at least 12 drinks in the past

year, and less than or equal to three

drinks per week in the past year. Current

moderate drinkers are defined as having

had at least 12 drinks in their lifetime,

at least 12 drinks in the past year, and

(male) more than three drinks per week

up to 14 drinks per week or (female)

more than three drinks per week up to

seven drinks per week. Current heavier

drinkers are defined as having had at

least 12 drinks in their lifetime, at least

12 drinks in the past year, and (male)

over 14 drinks per week in the past year

or (female) over seven drinks per week

in the past year (average consumption).

Body mass index—Body mass index

(BMI) is calculated from the sample

adult’s responses to survey questions

regarding height and weight. BMI is

weight (in kg)/[height (in m)]2

. For both

sexes, the category ‘‘underweight’’ is

defined as a BMI less than 18.5.

Healthy weight is defined as a BMI

greater than or equal to 18.5 and less

than 25.0. Overweight is defined as a

BMI greater than or equal to 25.0 and

less than 30.0. Obese is defined as a

BMI greater than or equal to 30.0.
16 Advance Data No. 392 + September 21, 2007

Leisure-time physical activity—All

questions related to leisure-time physical

activity are phrased in terms of current

behavior and lack a specific prior

reference period. Respondents are told

that they are being asked only about

leisure-time physical activities. Regular

activity refers to leisure-time activity

engaged in for a minimum specified

duration and a minimum specified

frequency.

Any regular activity—Is either

regular light-moderate, regular vigorous,

or both. It does not include other

combinations of activity levels (e.g.,

vigorous activity twice a week

combined with light-moderate activity

three times a week). The number of

individuals with such combinations of

activity is small.

Regular light-moderate activity—Is

light-moderate activity that occurs five

or more times per week for at least 30

minutes each time. Regular vigorous

activity—Is vigorous activity that occurs

three or more times per week for at

least 20 minutes each time.

Suggested citation

Schiller JS, Kramarow EA, Dey AN. Fall injury

episodes among noninstitutionalized older

adults: United States, 2001–2003. Advance

data from vital and health statistics; no 392.

Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health

Statistics. 2007.

Copyright information

All material appearing in this report is in the

public domain and may be reproduced or

copied without permission; citation as to

source, however, is appreciated.

National Center for Health Statistics

Director

Edward J. Sondik, Ph.D.

Acting Co-Deputy Directors

Jennifer H. Madans, Ph.D.

Michael H. Sadagursky

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF

HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

National Center for Health Statistics

3311 Toledo Road

Hyattsville, MD 20782

FIRST CLASS

POSTAGE & FEES PAID

CDC/NCHS

PERMIT NO. G-284

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300

To receive this publication regularly, contact

the National Center for Health Statistics by

calling 1-800-232-4636

E-mail: nchsquery@cdc.gov

Internet: www.cdc.gov/nchs

CS113663 (9/2007)

T29524

DHHS Publication No. (PHS) 2007-1250