Suppr超能文献

水疗法是否具有成本效益?一项针对幼年特发性关节炎儿童的联合水疗法方案与物理疗法陆地技术的随机对照试验。

Is hydrotherapy cost-effective? A randomised controlled trial of combined hydrotherapy programmes compared with physiotherapy land techniques in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis.

作者信息

Epps H, Ginnelly L, Utley M, Southwood T, Gallivan S, Sculpher M, Woo P

机构信息

The Children's Trust, Tadworth Court, UK.

出版信息

Health Technol Assess. 2005 Oct;9(39):iii-iv, ix-x, 1-59. doi: 10.3310/hta9390.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of combined hydrotherapy and land-based physiotherapy (combined) with land-based physiotherapy only (land) on cost, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and outcome of disease in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). Also to determine the cost-effectiveness of combined hydrotherapy and land-based physiotherapy in JIA.

DESIGN

A multicentre randomised controlled, partially blinded trial was designed with 100 patients in a control arm receiving land-based physiotherapy only (land group) and 100 patients in an intervention arm receiving a combination of hydrotherapy and land-based physiotherapy (combined group).

SETTING

Three tertiary centres in the UK.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients aged 4-19 years diagnosed more than 3 months with idiopathic arthritides, onset before their 16th birthday, stable on medication with at least one active joint.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients in the combined and land groups received 16 1-hour treatment sessions over 2 weeks followed by local physiotherapy attendances for 2 months.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Disease improvement defined as a decrease of > or =30% in any three of six core set variables without there being a 30% increase in more than one of the remaining three variables was used as the primary outcome measure and assessed at 2 months following completion of intervention. Health services resource use (in- and outpatient care, GP visits, drugs, interventions, and investigations) and productivity costs (parents' time away from paid work) were collected at 6 months follow-up. HRQoL was measured at baseline and 2 and 6 months following intervention using the EQ-5D, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were calculated. Secondary outcome measures at 2 and 6 months included cardiovascular fitness, pain, isometric muscle strength and patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight patients were recruited into the trial and received treatment. Two months after intervention 47% patients in the combined group and 61% patients in the land group had improved disease with 11 and 5% with worsened disease, respectively. The analysis showed no significant differences in mean costs and QALYs between the two groups. The combined group had slightly lower mean costs (-6.91 pounds Sterling) and lower mean QALYs (-0.0478, 95% confidence interval -0.11294 to 0.0163 based on 1000 bootstrap replications). All secondary measures demonstrated a mean improvement in both groups, with the combined group showing greater improvements in physical aspects of HRQoL and cardiovascular fitness.

CONCLUSIONS

JIA is a disease in which a cure is not available. This research demonstrates a beneficial effect from both combined hydrotherapy and land-based physiotherapy treatment and land-based physiotherapy treatment alone in JIA without any exacerbation of disease, indicating that treatments are safe. The caveat to the results of the cost-effectiveness and clinical efficacy analysis is that the restricted sample size could have prevented a true difference being detected between the groups. Nevertheless, there appears to be no evidence to justify the costs of building pools or initiating new services specifically for use in this disease. However, this conclusion may not apply to patients with unremitting active disease who could not be entered into the trial because of specified exclusion criteria. For this group, hydrotherapy or combined treatment may still be the only physiotherapy option. Further research is suggested into: the investigation and development of appropriate and sensitive outcome measures for use in future hydrotherapy and physiotherapy trials of JIA; preliminary studies of methodologies in complex interventions such as physiotherapy and hydrotherapy to improve recruitment and ensure protocol is acceptable to patients and carers; hydrotherapy in the most common paediatric user group, children with neurological dysfunction, ensuring appropriate outcome measures are available and methodologies previously tried; patient satisfaction and compliance in land-based physiotherapy and hydrotherapy and European studies of hydrotherapy in rare disorders such as JIA.

摘要

目的

比较水疗与陆地物理治疗相结合(联合治疗)和仅采用陆地物理治疗(陆地治疗)对幼年特发性关节炎(JIA)患儿的费用、健康相关生活质量(HRQoL)及疾病转归的影响。同时确定联合水疗与陆地物理治疗在JIA中的成本效益。

设计

一项多中心随机对照、部分盲法试验,100例患者在对照组仅接受陆地物理治疗(陆地组),100例患者在干预组接受水疗与陆地物理治疗相结合的治疗(联合组)。

地点

英国的三个三级中心。

参与者

年龄4 - 19岁,诊断为特发性关节炎超过3个月,发病于16岁生日之前,至少有一个活动关节且病情在药物治疗下稳定的患者。

干预措施

联合组和陆地组的患者在2周内接受16次每次1小时的治疗,随后进行2个月的局部物理治疗。

主要结局指标

疾病改善定义为六个核心指标变量中的任意三个减少≥30%,且其余三个变量中无超过一个变量增加≥30%,以此作为主要结局指标,并在干预完成后2个月进行评估。在随访6个月时收集卫生服务资源利用情况(门诊和住院治疗、全科医生诊疗、药物、干预措施及检查)及生产力成本(父母带薪工作时间损失)。使用EQ - 5D在基线、干预后2个月和6个月测量HRQoL,并计算质量调整生命年(QALYs)。干预后2个月和6个月的次要结局指标包括心血管适能、疼痛、等长肌肉力量及患者满意度。

结果

78例患者被纳入试验并接受治疗。干预后2个月,联合组47%的患者疾病得到改善,陆地组为61%,联合组和陆地组疾病恶化的患者分别为11%和5%。分析显示两组之间的平均费用和QALYs无显著差异。联合组的平均费用略低(- 6.91英镑),平均QALYs也较低(- 0.0478,基于1000次自抽样复制的95%置信区间为- 0.11294至0.0163)。所有次要指标在两组中均显示出平均改善,联合组在HRQoL的身体方面和心血管适能方面改善更大。

结论

JIA是一种无法治愈的疾病。本研究表明,联合水疗与陆地物理治疗及单独的陆地物理治疗对JIA均有有益效果,且不会使疾病加重,表明这些治疗是安全的。成本效益和临床疗效分析结果的注意事项是,样本量有限可能阻止了检测到两组之间的真正差异。然而,似乎没有证据证明专门为该疾病建造泳池或启动新服务的成本是合理的。但是,这一结论可能不适用于因特定排除标准而无法纳入试验的持续活动性疾病患者。对于这组患者,水疗或联合治疗可能仍然是唯一的物理治疗选择。建议进一步开展以下研究:为未来JIA的水疗和物理治疗试验研究和开发合适且敏感的结局指标;对物理治疗和水疗等复杂干预措施的方法进行初步研究,以改善招募情况并确保方案为患者及护理人员所接受;对最常见的儿科用户群体,即神经功能障碍儿童进行水疗,确保有合适的结局指标并采用之前尝试过的方法;陆地物理治疗和水疗中的患者满意度及依从性,以及欧洲对JIA等罕见疾病水疗的研究。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验