Bristol Trials Centre, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Health Technol Assess. 2024 Apr;28(22):1-94. doi: 10.3310/CMYW9226.
The extra benefit of a programme of physiotherapy in addition to advice alone, following first-time traumatic shoulder dislocation, is uncertain. We compared the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a single session of advice with a single session of advice and a programme of physiotherapy.
The primary objective was to quantify and draw inferences about observed differences in the Oxford Shoulder Instability Score between the trial treatment groups 6 months post randomisation, in adults with a first-time traumatic shoulder dislocation.
A pragmatic, multicentre, superiority, randomised controlled trial with embedded qualitative study.
Forty-one hospitals in the UK NHS.
Adults with a radiologically confirmed first-time traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation, being managed non-operatively. People with neurovascular complications or bilateral dislocations, and those unable to adhere to trial procedures or unable to attend physiotherapy within 6 weeks of injury, or who had previously been randomised, were excluded.
All participants received the same initial shoulder examination followed by advice to aid self-management, lasting up to 1 hour and administered by a physiotherapist (control). Participants randomised to receive an additional programme of physiotherapy were offered sessions lasting for up to 30 minutes, over a maximum duration of 4 months from the date of randomisation (intervention).
The primary outcome measure was the Oxford Shoulder Instability Score. This is a self-completed outcome measure containing 12 questions (0-4 points each), with possible scores from 0 (worst function) to 48 (best function). Measurements were collected at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months and 12 months by postal questionnaire; 6 months was the primary outcome time point. The primary health outcome for economic evaluation was the quality-adjusted life-year, in accordance with National Institute of Health and Care Excellence guidelines.
Between 14 November 2018 and 14 March 2022, 482 participants were randomised to advice ( = 240) or advice and a programme of physiotherapy ( = 242). Participants were 34% female, with a mean age of 45 years, and treatment arms were balanced at baseline. There was not a statistically significant difference in the primary outcome between advice only and advice plus a programme of physiotherapy at 6 months for the primary intention-to-treat adjusted analysis (favours physiotherapy: 1.5, 95% confidence interval -0.3 to 3.5) or at earlier 3-month and 6-week time points on the Oxford Shoulder Instability Score (0-48; higher scores indicate better function). The probability of physiotherapy being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £30,000 was 0.95.
We found little difference in the primary outcome or other secondary outcomes. Advice with additional physiotherapy sessions was found likely to be cost-effective. However, small imprecise incremental costs and quality-adjusted life-years raise questions on whether it is the best use of scarce physiotherapy resources given current service demands.
Loss to follow-up was 27%; however, the observed standard deviation was much smaller than anticipated. These changes in parameters reduced the number of participants required to observe the planned target difference of four points. Our post hoc sensitivity analysis, accounting for missing data, gives similar results.
Further research should be directed towards optimising self-management strategies.
This study is registered as ISRCTN63184243.
This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 16/167/56) and is published in full in ; Vol. 28, No. 22. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.
首次创伤性肩脱位后,除了建议之外,物理治疗方案的额外益处尚不确定。我们比较了单次咨询与单次咨询加物理治疗方案对初次创伤性肩脱位成人的临床和成本效益。
主要目的是量化并推断试验治疗组在随机分组后 6 个月时牛津肩部不稳定评分之间的差异,该评分适用于首次创伤性肩脱位的成年人。
一项具有嵌入式定性研究的实用、多中心、优越性、随机对照试验。
英国国民保健制度下的 41 家医院。
经放射学证实的初次创伤性前肩脱位、非手术治疗的成年人。患有神经血管并发症或双侧脱位的人,以及无法遵守试验程序或在受伤后 6 周内无法接受物理治疗或以前曾被随机分配的人被排除在外。
所有参与者都接受了相同的初始肩部检查,随后接受了帮助自我管理的建议,持续时间长达 1 小时,并由物理治疗师(对照组)提供。随机接受额外物理治疗方案的参与者被提供最多 30 分钟的课程,从随机分组日期起最长持续 4 个月(干预组)。
主要结果测量是牛津肩部不稳定评分。这是一种自我完成的结果测量,包含 12 个问题(每个问题 0-4 分),可能的分数范围为 0(最差功能)至 48(最佳功能)。测量结果通过邮寄问卷在 6 周、3 个月、6 个月和 12 个月时收集;6 个月是主要的结果时间点。根据国家卫生与保健卓越研究所的指南,经济评估的主要健康结果是质量调整生命年。
2018 年 11 月 14 日至 2022 年 3 月 14 日,482 名参与者被随机分配至建议组(n = 240)或建议加物理治疗方案组(n = 242)。参与者中 34%为女性,平均年龄为 45 岁,治疗组在基线时平衡。在主要意向治疗调整分析中,在 6 个月时,主要结局在建议组与建议加物理治疗组之间没有统计学意义上的差异(有利于物理治疗:1.5,95%置信区间-0.3 至 3.5),或在较早的 3 个月和 6 周时间点的牛津肩部不稳定评分(0-48;分数越高表示功能越好)。在愿意支付 30000 英镑的意愿支付阈值下,物理治疗具有成本效益的概率为 0.95。
我们发现主要结局或其他次要结局没有差异。建议加额外的物理治疗课程可能具有成本效益。然而,较小的、不精确的增量成本和质量调整生命年提出了一个问题,即鉴于当前的服务需求,这是否是最有效地利用稀缺的物理治疗资源的方法。
失访率为 27%;然而,观察到的标准差比预期的小得多。这些参数的变化减少了观察到计划目标差异 4 分所需的参与者人数。我们的事后敏感性分析,考虑了缺失数据,给出了类似的结果。
应进一步研究优化自我管理策略。
这项研究由英国国家卫生与保健卓越研究所(NIHR)健康技术评估计划资助(NIHR 奖编号:16/167/56),并在 中全文发表;第 28 卷,第 22 期。有关进一步的奖励信息,请访问 NIHR 资助和奖励网站。