Coulter Corinne L, Weber Jeanie M, Scarvell Jennie M
Physiotherapy Department, Canberra Hospital, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009 Oct;90(10):1727-33. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2009.04.019.
Coulter CL, Weber JM, Scarvell JM. Group physiotherapy provides similar outcomes for participants after joint replacement surgery as 1-to-1 physiotherapy: a sequential cohort study.
To compare effectiveness and time efficiency of physiotherapy rehabilitation provided within a group with an individualized program provided at home for improving participants' outcomes after total joint replacement surgery.
Quasiexperimental sequential cohort trial with 12-week follow-up.
A tertiary acute care hospital.
Consecutive patients (N=51) having hip or knee replacement surgery in an 8-month period and who were able to weight-bear postoperatively.
The first group admitted to the study entered the exercise group, and patients in the following 4 months entered the home physiotherapy group.
Primary outcome measures included the Western Ontario McMaster's University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), Timed Up & Go (TUG) test, and knee range of motion (ROM). Secondary measures included the 6-m walk test and a patient evaluation questionnaire. Staff time costs were recorded. Outcomes were recorded preoperatively or at hospital discharge, and 5 and 12 weeks postoperatively.
There was no difference between the 2 groups for either the WOMAC or SF-36 scores, 6-m walk test, TUG test, or ROM measures at 12 weeks (P>.05), although both groups of patients improved between hospital discharge and 12 weeks. The class group accessed more frequent physiotherapy than the home group (mean, 7.5 and 3.96 visits, respectively). The physiotherapist's time was less per patient per visit for the class group (mean, 27min direct and 10min indirect) than for the home visits (mean, 38min direct and 26min indirect).
This trial suggests that the class-based exercise rehabilitation was the most efficient method of delivery of the physiotherapy service, without cost to patient outcomes.
库尔特·CL、韦伯·JM、斯卡维尔·JM。小组物理治疗与一对一物理治疗对关节置换术后参与者的效果相似:一项序贯队列研究。
比较小组内提供的物理治疗康复与在家中提供的个性化方案在改善全关节置换术后参与者结局方面的有效性和时间效率。
进行为期12周随访的准实验性序贯队列试验。
一家三级急症护理医院。
在8个月期间连续接受髋或膝关节置换手术且术后能够负重的患者(N = 51)。
首批纳入研究的患者进入运动组,随后4个月的患者进入家庭物理治疗组。
主要结局指标包括西安大略和麦克马斯特大学骨关节炎指数(WOMAC)、医学结局研究36项简短健康调查(SF - 36)、定时起立行走(TUG)测试以及膝关节活动范围(ROM)。次要指标包括6米步行测试和患者评估问卷。记录工作人员的时间成本。在术前或出院时以及术后5周和12周记录结局。
两组在12周时的WOMAC或SF - 36评分、6米步行测试、TUG测试或ROM测量方面均无差异(P >.05),尽管两组患者在出院至12周期间均有改善。运动组接受物理治疗的频率高于家庭组(平均分别为7.5次和3.96次就诊)。运动组每次就诊时物理治疗师花费在每位患者身上的时间(平均直接时间27分钟和间接时间10分钟)比家访(平均直接时间38分钟和间接时间26分钟)少。
该试验表明,基于小组的运动康复是提供物理治疗服务的最有效方法,且不影响患者结局。