To explore why there is variation in implementation of multifactorial falls prevention practices that are recommended to reduce falls risks for older patients in hospital.

Mixed method, realist evaluation.

Three older persons and three orthopaedic wards in acute hospitals in England.

Healthcare professionals, including nurses, therapists and doctors (n=40), and patients aged 65 and over, and carers (n=31).

We examined mechanisms hypothesised to underpin the implementation of multifactorial falls risk assessment and multidomain, personalised prevention plans.

We developed an explanation detailing that how contextual factors supported or constrained implementation of recommended falls prevention practices.

Nurses led delivery of falls risk assessment and prevention planning using their organisation’s electronic health records (EHR) to guide and document these practices. Implementation of recommended practices was influenced by (1) organisational EHR systems that differed in falls risk assessment items they included, (2) competing priorities on nurse time that could reduce falls risk assessment to a tick box exercise, encourage ‘blanket’ rather than tailored interventions and that constrained nurse time with patients to personalise prevention plans and (3) established but not recommended falls prevention practices, such as risk screening, that focused multidisciplinary communication on patients screened as at high risk of falls and that emphasised nursing, rather than Multidisciplinary Team (MDT), responsibility for preventing falls through constant patient supervision.

To promote consistent delivery of multifactorial falls prevention practices, and to help ease the nursing burden, organisations should consider how electronic systems and established ward-based practices can be reconfigured to support greater multidisciplinary staff and patient and carer involvement in modification of individual falls risks.

Post-intensive care syndrome (PICS) describes a cluster of ongoing symptoms experienced by a large proportion of patients previously admitted to critical care. Despite a large rise in survival following critical care, interventions to support recovery and combat PICS are lacking. It has been suggested that the use of digital tools such as virtual reality (VR) may play a useful role in the development of recovery-supporting interventions. We engaged with people with lived experience of critical care admission to coproduce a VR intervention (ViRtual REality to AiD recoverY post ICU (VR READY)). Here, we present a protocol for the initial feasibility and acceptability testing of this intervention.

This is a single-arm, single-site, non-randomised feasibility trial of VR READY. Up to 25 participants recently admitted to critical care will be recruited to use the VR READY intervention for at least 5 min per day for a period of 14 days. Participants must have capacity to consent and be free from ongoing delirium in order to participate. Outcomes relating to sleep and well-being will be measured at baseline and at day 14 after intervention delivery. The primary outcome is feasibility, which will be assessed according to prespecified criteria. Participants will complete a qualitative interview to assess acceptability of the intervention, trial design and outcomes approximately 1 month after completing the intervention period. No formal statistical analysis of outcomes will be conducted, but these will be summarised descriptively. Interviews will be subjected to reflexive thematic analysis.

This study received a favourable ethical opinion by North-East York Research Ethics Committee (Ref 23/NE/0113) in June 2024. Study results will be disseminated through the peer review literature, ISRCTN registry and directly to participants, which will be facilitated by the study public and patient involvement steering group.

ISRCTN88854487.