Nursing Research and Development, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, 8700 Beverly Blvd, Suite 2021, Los Angeles, CA 90048, USA.
PM R. 2012 Apr;4(4):264-72. doi: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2011.10.002. Epub 2012 Jan 13.
To assess whether clusters of patients with hip fracture and with distinct initial recovery trajectories (IRT) could be identified by using practice-based evidence data and to examine the validity of these data.
Analysis of multisite prospective observational cohort study database.
Eighteen skilled nursing and inpatient rehabilitation facilities.
Patients with hip fractures (N = 226) treated with joint replacement and admitted to skilled nursing or inpatient rehabilitation facilities, subset (n = 85), with telephone follow-up results approximately 8 months after rehabilitation discharge. Patients' ages were 76.8 ± 11.4 years; the majority were women (78%) and white (87%).
Measurements included medical severity by using the Comprehensive Severity Index and functional levels by using Functional Independence Measure (FIM). The IRT was calculated for each patient as the rate of change in function from the time of surgery to rehabilitation admission. We used cluster analysis to partition patients into subsets that shared common IRT scores. Validity was explored by comparing subgroups across patient characteristics and treatment patterns. Significance was defined as P ≤ .05.
IRT grouping, Comprehensive Severity Index, FIM, discharge location, living location at follow-up.
We identified 3 patient clusters with differentiated IRT scores: group 1: 4.96 ± 2.45 (range, 0.4-8.6) FIM point change per day; group 2: 12.42 ± 2.51 (range, 8.9-17.0); group 3: 26.80 ± 13.78 (range, 17.5-70.0). Clinical group validation was established from statistically different Comprehensive Severity Index scores on admission; FIM scores at admission, discharge, and follow-up; and discharge and 8-month living settings. Calculation of IRT recovery curves by using FIM scores and associated time in days through logarithmic regression curves confirmed each group's IRT remained distinct through rehabilitation and follow-up.
The IRT concept appears to be valid in patients with hip fracture who were treated with hip arthroplasty, and may assist in evaluating and comparing the effectiveness of postacute rehabilitation services.
利用基于实践的证据数据评估是否可以识别髋部骨折患者具有不同初始恢复轨迹(IRT)的聚类,并检验这些数据的有效性。
多站点前瞻性观察队列研究数据库分析。
18 个熟练护理和住院康复设施。
髋部骨折患者(N=226)接受关节置换治疗并入住熟练护理或住院康复设施,亚组(n=85)在康复出院后约 8 个月进行电话随访。患者年龄为 76.8±11.4 岁;大多数为女性(78%)和白人(87%)。
测量包括使用综合严重程度指数的医疗严重程度和使用功能独立性测量(FIM)的功能水平。每个患者的 IRT 是从手术到康复入院期间功能变化的速率。我们使用聚类分析将患者分为具有共同 IRT 评分的亚组。通过比较患者特征和治疗模式的亚组来探索有效性。定义显著性为 P≤0.05。
IRT 分组、综合严重程度指数、FIM、出院地点、随访时的居住地点。
我们确定了 3 个具有不同 IRT 评分的患者聚类:第 1 组:4.96±2.45(范围,0.4-8.6)FIM 点每天变化;第 2 组:12.42±2.51(范围,8.9-17.0);第 3 组:26.80±13.78(范围,17.5-70.0)。入院时统计学上不同的综合严重程度指数评分、入院时、出院时和随访时的 FIM 评分以及出院和 8 个月的居住环境确立了临床分组验证。通过对数回归曲线计算使用 FIM 评分和相关天数的 IRT 恢复曲线,证实每个组的 IRT 在康复和随访过程中仍然存在明显差异。
在接受髋关节置换治疗的髋部骨折患者中,IRT 概念似乎是有效的,并且可能有助于评估和比较急性后康复服务的效果。