Content uploaded by Kuang Hock Lim
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Kuang Hock Lim on Feb 11, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Asian J Gerontol Geriatr 2013; 8: ?–?
1
Asian Journal of Gerontology & Geriatrics Vol 8 No 2 December 2013
Risk factors of home injury among
elderly people in Malaysia
KH Lim1, MSc, Bsc, K Jasvindar1, MPH, MBBS, I Normala2, PHD, MB Bch,
BK Ho3, M(med) Fam Medicine, MBBS, WK Yau4, MRCP, MBBS, S Mohmad5,
MPH, MBBS, WY Lai1, MBBS, MS Sherina2, PHD, MBBS
ABSTRACT
Background. Home injuries among elderly people are a public health
concern. This study aimed to determine the frequency and risk factors
of home injuries among elderly people in Malaysia.
Methods. The Third National Health and Morbidity survey in 2006
was carried out from April to July 2006. The sample was proportional to
population size and selected in 2 stages. Data were collected through
face-to-face interviews using a validated questionnaire. Only injuries
occurring within the previous year were included to avoid recall bias.
The types of home injury, places where the injuries occurred, ability to
work after the injury, and hospital admission were recorded, as were
demographic variables such as sex, age, marital status, ethnicity, and
residential area.
Results. Of 4842 respondents aged ≥60 years, 279 (5.8%) had
experienced some kind of home injury within the previous year. The
most common types of injury were fall (n=205), cuts (n=43), and being
struck by objects (n=14). The most common injury locations were the
kitchen (n=81), garden (n=65), bathroom/toilet (n=45), living room
(n=26), bedroom (n=22), and stairs (n=21). Home injury rates were
significantly higher among women than men (7.4% vs. 3.9%, p<0.001).
Married elderly people were less likely to have a home injury than
divorced/widowed or single elderly people (4.9% vs. 8.0% vs. 8.0%).
Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that women (adjusted
odds ratio [OR]=1.87, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.37-2.55) and
respondents aged 70-74 years (adjusted OR=1.45, 95% CI=1.02-2.07)
were more likely to sustain a home injury.
Conclusion. With the increase in the elderly population, home injury
prevention programmes are urgently needed.
Key words: Accidental falls; Health services for the aged; Malaysia;
Wounds and injuries
1 Institute For Public Health, Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia
2 Psychiatric Department, University Putra
Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia
3 Kapar Health Clinic, Selangor, Malaysia
4 Geriatric Unit, Kuala Lumpur General
Hospital, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
5 Family Health Unit, Ministry of Health,
Putrajaya, Malaysia
Correspondence to: Kuang Hock Lim, Section
of Proposal Development, Institute For Public
Health, Jalan Bangsar, 50599, Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia. Email: limkh@iku.moh.gov.my
home injuries among elderly people in developing
and middle-income countries have been reported.7,8
According to the Second National Health
Morbidity Survey in 1996, the prevalence of home
injury in Malaysia was 2.5%, and was higher in
adults older than 80 years.9 Women, pensioners, and
INTRODUCTION
Injury among elderly people is usually associated
with high morbidity and mortality, and is thus a public
health concern.1–3 It requires longer hospitalisation
and more extensive medical attention, resulting in a
greater health care burden.4–6 Only a few studies of
2 Asian Journal of Gerontology & Geriatrics Vol 8 No 2 December 2013
Lim et al
housewives were highly associated with home injury
because of the long periods spent at home. Home
injuries among people aged ≥60 years were about
8%; falls, poisoning, and choking/suffocation were
the most common causes.10 Compounds, kitchens,
and living rooms were the most common locations
of home injuries.9,10
The health service system of Malaysia is strained
by the rapidly ageing population, who need medical
attention for multiple and chronic illnesses more
frequently than do younger people.11 Home injuries
are largely preventable, and preventive measures can
reduce the health care burden.
Based on the Third National Health Morbidity
Survey in 2006,12 this population-based survey
assessed home injuries among elderly people within
the previous year for policy makers to formulate
preventive measures.
METHODS
The Third National Health and Morbidity survey12
was carried out from April to July 2006. The sample
was proportional to population size and selected in
2 stages, based on the 2004 Labour Force Survey
sampling frame from the Department of Statistics,
Malaysia. Households were stratified by state and
urban/rural setting. The number of households
selected was based on an expected 4.4 respondents
per household. The total sample size was based
on a prevalence of 10%, a margin of error of 1.2,
and a design effect of 2. Enumeration blocks were
geographically contiguous areas consisting of 80
to 120 households and constituted the primary
sampling units, whereas households were the
secondary sampling units. All household members
aged ≥18 years were interviewed. A total of 2150
enumeration blocks (1424 in urban and 726 in
rural areas) consisting of 17 251 households were
randomly selected.
Written informed consent was given by each
participant before the interview. The study was
approved by the Medical Research Ethics Committee,
Ministry of Health, Malaysia. Data were collected in
face-to-face interviews by trained interviewers using
a validated questionnaire, which was pre-tested in 3
districts (Klang, Bangsar, and Sepang) of urban and
rural areas. Households were visited up to 3 times to
achieve an interview. Only injuries occurring within
the previous year were included to avoid recall bias.
The type of home injury, places where the injuries
occurred, ability to work after the injury, and hospital
admission were recorded, as were demographic
variables such as sex, age, marital status, ethnicity,
and residential area.
Education levels were categorised into: no formal
education, primary education (1-6 years), secondary
education (7-12 years), and tertiary education (>12
years). Residential area was determined based on
the Department of Statistics criteria. Age groups
were categorised into: 60-64 years, 65-69 years,
70-74 years, 75-79 years, and ≥80 years. Monthly
household income (in Ringgit Malaysia [RM]) was
classified into: <1000, 1000-1999, 2000-2999, 3000-
3999, 4000-4999, and ≥5000.
Any discrepancies in data were checked by
referring to the original questionnaire. Descriptive
statistics were used to estimate the prevalence,
mechanism, place, and outcome of the home injury.
Multiple regression analysis was used to determine
the effect of each variable on home injury after
controlling for potential confounders. All statistical
analyses were carried out at the 95% confidence
interval (CI).
RESULTS
34 305 respondents aged ≥18 years were
interviewed. The response rate was 96.7%. Data of
4842 respondents aged ≥60 years (mean, 68.4 years;
standard deviation, 6.74 years) were analysed. Of
whom, 53.6% were women; 68.8% were married;
86.5% had primary or no education; and 54.1%
earned <999 RM per month (Table).
279 (5.8%) of the respondents had experienced
some kind of home injury, 82 of whom were unable
to perform activities of daily living after injury, and
37 of whom were admitted to hospital. The most
common types of injury were falls (n=205), cuts
(n=43), and being struck by objects (n=14). The most
common injury locations were the kitchen (n=81),
garden (n=65), bathroom/toilet (n=45), living room
(n=26), bedroom (n=22), and stairs (n=21). Home
injury rates were significantly higher among women
than men (7.4% vs. 3.9%, p<0.001). Married elderly
people were less likely to have home injury than
3
Asian Journal of Gerontology & Geriatrics Vol 8 No 2 December 2013
Risk factors of home injury among elderly people in Malaysia
divorced/widowed or single elderly people (4.9% vs.
8.0% vs. 8.0%) [Table].
Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed
that women (adjusted odds ratio [OR]=1.87, 95%
CI=1.37-2.55) and respondents aged 70-74 years
(adjusted OR=1.45, 95% CI=1.02-2.07) were more
likely to sustain a home injury (Table). Other
Variable No. (%) of respondents* Crude OR
(95% CI)
p Value Adjusted OR
(95% CI)
p Value
Total Injury No injury
Nationality
Malaysian 4784 (98.9) 277 (5.8) 4491 (94.2) 1.57 (0.38-6.49) 0.53 1.21 (0.25-5.80) 0.816
Non-Malaysian 54 (1.1) 2 (3.8) 51 (96.2) 1 - 1 -
Sex
Male 2250 (46.4) 87 (3.9) 2156 (96.1) 1 - 1 -
Female 2592 (53.6) 192 (7.4) 2390 (92.6) 1.99 (1.54-2.58) <0.001 1.87 (1.37-2.55) <0.001
Residence
Urban 2457 (50.7) 135 (5.5) 2315 (94.5) 1 - 1 -
Rural 2385 (49.3) 144 (6.1) 2231 (93.9) 1.11 (0.87-1.41) 0.41 1.08 (0.80-1.47) 0.632
Age group (years)
60-64 1646 (34.2) 84 (5.1) 1558 (94.9) 1 - 1 -
65-69 1415 (29.4) 73 (5.2) 1341 (94.8) 1.01 (0.73-1.93) 0.95 0.97 (0.68-1.37) 0.857
70-74 888 (18.5) 66 (7.5) 819 (92.5) 1.45 (1.07-2.09) 0.02 1.45 (1.02-2.07) 0.040
75-79 486 (10.1) 27 (5.6) 456 (94.4) 1.10 (0.70-1.72) 0.68 1.14 (0.70-1.86) 0.593
≥80 378 (7.8) 29 (7.8) 343 (92.2) 1.57 (1.01-2.43) 0.04 1.30 (0.79-2.15) 0.296
Ethnicity
Malay 2546 (52.6) 134 (5.3) 2407 (94.7) 0.70 (0.32-1.54) 0.38 0.99 (0.69-1.42) 0.408
Chinese 1377 (28.4) 68 (6.3 1303 (93.7) 0.66 (0.29-1.47) 0.69 1.54 (0.94-2.52) 0.400
Indian 301 (6.2) 23 (7.6) 278 (92.4) 1.04 (0.43-2.51) 0.93 0.98 (0.35-2.75) 0.970
Other indigenous 523 (10.8) 47 (9.1) 470 (90.9) 1.26 (0.55-2.87) 0.59 1.51 (0.57-3.99 0.728
Other 95 (2.0) 7 (7.4) 88 (92.6) 1 - 1 -
Education
None 1922 (40.2) 131 (6.9) 1781 (93.1) 2.80 (0.68-11.51) 0.16 1.56 (0.35-6.96) 0.560
Primary 2214 (46.3) 116 (5.3) 2092 (94.70 2.11 (0.51-8.68) 0.30 1.62 (0.38-7.02) 0.516
Secondary 563 (11.8) 25 (4.40) 537 (95.6) 1.77 (0.41-0.77) 0.44 1.47 (0.31-6.66) 0.636
Tertiary 78 (1.6) 2 (2.6) 76 (97.4) 1 - 1 -
Marital status
Single 89 (1.9) 7 (8.0) 81 (92.0) 1.69 (0.77-3.72) 0.19 1.84 (0.82-4.15) 0.140
Married 3305 (68.8) 160 (4.9) 3137 (95.1) 1 - 1 -
Divorced/widowed 1411 (29.3) 112 (8.0) 1291 (92.0) 1.70 (1.32-2.18) 0.001 1.16 (0.87-1.54) 0.316
Income (Ringgit Malaysia)
<999 2435 (54.1) 145 (6.0) 2279 (94.0) 0.84 (0.54-1.39) 0.49 0.80 (0.43-1.50) 0.493
1000-1999 972 (21.6) 53 (5.5) 919 (94.5) 0.76 (0.44-1.32) 0.33 0.84 (0.44-1.59) 0.586
2000-2999 509 (11.3) 27 (5.3) 480 (94.7) 0.74 (0.40-1.37) 0.34 0.71 (0.36-1.40) 0.322
3000-3999 214 (4.8) 12 (5.7) 200 (94.3) 0.79 (0.37-1.68) 0.54 0.76 (0.35-1.64) 0.484
4000-4999 105 (2.3) 9 (8.6) 96 (91.4) 1.23 (0.54-2.84) 0.62 1.34 (0.50-3.60) 0.555
>5000 264 (6.9) 18 (7.1) 237 (92.9) 1 - 1 -
Table
Risk factors of home injury among elderly people in Malaysia before and after controlling for confounders (n=4842)
* Total percentage may not add up to 100, owing to missing data
4 Asian Journal of Gerontology & Geriatrics Vol 8 No 2 December 2013
Lim et al
variables that were significant in the univariate
analysis did not reach significance after controlling
for social and demographic variables.
DISCUSSION
In the current study, 5.8% of the elderly population
had some kind of home injury within the previous
year, which is comparatively lower than in other
studies.13-16 This could be due to the fact that
the current study was conducted in community
households, and not in a hospital setting or nursing
homes. In addition, this study did not include
mortality cases secondary to home injuries or other
types of injuries, such as motor vehicle accidents,
which are common in other countries.16
The most common cause of injury was falls,
which corresponds with the findings of a study in
Verona, Italy, in which falls accounted for 75% of
injuries among elderly people aged 65 to 99 years
admitted to geriatric departments of public and
private hospitals.13 Of 460 trauma admissions to a
hospital in Ontario, Canada over 3 years (2000-2003),
125 (27.2%) were for elderly people aged ≥65 years.
The main reasons for admission were falls (64%)
and motor vehicle accidents (27%).16 Among 720
patients aged ≥65 years presenting with trauma to
an emergency department in Singapore, 67.9% were
home injuries, 85.3% of which were caused by falls,
74.1% of which occurred at home.17 The frequency of
home injuries was higher among men until the age
of 50 years, but was higher among women for the
older age groups.18 This can be explained by different
activities performed by different sexes and ages of
people. Younger men (aged 31-40 years) are more
interested in repair and do-it-yourself activities,
whereas women are more involved in domestic work
activities.18 In addition, life expectancy is higher for
women.18 Home injuries occurred more commonly
among women and in the kitchen, as women are
more likely to be involved with kitchen activities
such as cooking and cleaning.13,18,19 Women tend to
incur more home injuries because of the nature of
their work within the home.17
The increase in home injuries in elderly people
aged >65 years, particularly those >70 years, can be
due to diminished reflexes and chronic diseases.16
Independent risk factors for subsequent falls
among respondents aged ≥85 years were a history
of recurrent falling, poor vision, use of antipsychotic
drugs, and feelings of anxiety, nervousness, or fear.20
As the life expectancy of Malaysians increases,
the rate of home injuries among elderly people
is expected to increase. Most home injuries can
be prevented. Elderly people should be taught to
practice safety measures at home. Improvement
in home furnishings, especially in accident-prone
areas such as the kitchen and bathroom/toilet is
necessary.1,14 As fall was the major cause of home
injury, fall prevention measures should include
regular medical check-ups for visual acuity, activities
of daily living, physical health, and cognitive and
memory functioning, and home inspection to ensure
adequate lighting, railings and support bars in toilets/
bathrooms, and proper arrangement of furniture to
avoid tripping and falls.21,22
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We thank the Director-General of Health, Malaysia
for his permission to publish this paper.
REFERENCES
1. Runyan CW, Casteel C, Perkis D, et al. Unintentional injuries in
the home in the United States Part I: mortality. Am J Prev Med
2005;28:73-9.
2. Runyan CW, Perkis D, Marshall SW, et al. Unintentional injuries
in the home in the United States Part II: morbidity. Am J Prev Med
2005;28:80-7.
3. Scott VJ, Gallagher EM. Mortality and morbidity related to injuries
from falls in British Columbia. Can J Public Health 1999;90:343-7.
4. Miller TR, Levy DT. Cost-outcome analysis in injury prevention
and control: eighty-four recent estimates for the United States.
Med Care 2000;38:562-82.
5. Scuffham P, Chaplin S, Legood R. Incidence and costs of
unintentional falls in older people in the United Kingdom. J
Epidemiol Community Health 2003;57:740-4.
6. Thanh NX, Hang HM, Chuc NT, Lindholm L. The economic
burden of unintentional injuries: a community-based cost
analysis in Bavi, Vietnam. Scand J Public Health Suppl 2003;62:45-
51.
7. Donmez L, Gokkoca Z. Accident profile of older people in
Antalya City Center, Turkey. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 2003;37:99-108.
8. Mohammadi R, Ekman R, Svanstrom L, Gooya MM.
Unintentional home-related injuries in the Islamic Republic of
Iran: findings from the first year of a national programme. Public
Health 2005;199:919-24.
9. Jamaiyah H, Tahir A, Farizah H. Home injury in Malaysia: findings
from the 1996 NHMS. Malays J Public Health Med 2000;1:48-54.
10. Hasni H, Junainah S, Jamaliah J. Epidemiology of home injury in
Malaysia. Jurnal Kesihatan Masyarakat 2003;9:1-7.
11. Ministry of Health, Malaysia. The Country Health Plan: 10th
Malaysia Plan (2011-2015). Kuala Lumpur; 2010.
12. Institute of Public Health, Ministry of Health, Malaysia. National
Health and Morbidity Survey. Kuala Lumpur; 2008.
13. Majory S, Di Signorelli D, Bonizzato G, Poli A, Romano G.
Evaluation of home injuries in elderly people (HIEP) in Verona
5
Asian Journal of Gerontology & Geriatrics Vol 8 No 2 December 2013
Risk factors of home injury among elderly people in Malaysia
area (North-East Italy). J Prev Med Hyg 1999;40:67-71.
14. Binder S. Injuries among older adults: the challenge of optimizing
safety and minimizing unintended consequences. Inj Prev
2002;8(Suppl 4):iv2-4.
15. Ritzel DO, Beasley D, Flynn J, Liefer M. Injuries to elderly women
in the home environment: a research review. Int Electron J Health
Educ 2001;4:64-6.
16. Gowing R, Jain MK. Injury patterns and outcomes associated
with elderly trauma victims in Kingston, Ontario. Can J Surg
2007;50:437-44.
17. Yeo YY, Lee SK, Lim CY, Quek LS, Ooi SB. A review of elderly
injuries seen in a Singapore emergency department. Singapore
Med J 2009;50:278-83.
18. Majori S, Ricci G, Capretta F, Rocca G, Baldovin T, Buonocore
F. Epidemiology of domestic injuries. A survey in an emergency
department in North-East Italy. J Prev Med Hyg 2009;50:164-9.
19. Sathiyasekaran BW. Population-based cohort study of injuries.
Injury 1996;27:695-8.
20. Iinattiniemi S, Jokelainen J, Luukinen H. Falls risk among a
very old home-dwelling population. Scand J Prim Health Care
2008:27:25-30.
21. Rivara FP, Grossman DC, Cummings P. Injury prevention. Second
of two parts. N Eng J Med 1997;337:613-8.
22. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center
for Injury Prevention and Control. Falls Among Older Adults:
An Overview, 2012. Available from http://www.cdc.gov/
HomeandRecreationalSafety/Falls/adultfalls.html. Accessed
December 4, 2012.