Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.

Detailed Search Results

Supervised or unsupervised rehabilitation after total hip replacement provides similar improvements for patients: a randomised controlled trial [with consumer summary]
Coulter C, Perriman DM, Neeman TM, Smith PN, Scarvell JM
Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2017 Nov;98(11):2253-2264
clinical trial
8/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: Yes; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: Yes; Adequate follow-up: Yes; Intention-to-treat analysis: Yes; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed*

OBJECTIVE: To determine do patients do better with unsupervised home PT or in an outpatient setting Are the outcomes after a supervised (centre-based) and an independent (home-based) physical rehabilitation program delivered in the early post-discharge phase (< 8 weeks) equivalent in an adult THR population. SETTING: Acute care public hospital in the region, supporting a population of almost 540,000. DESIGN: Single blinded randomised controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients (n = 98) after unilateral elective total hip replacement (THR) were randomly assigned to supervised/centre-based exercise (n = 56) or unsupervised/home exercise (n = 42) and followed 6 months post-surgery. INTERVENTION: The supervised group attended a 4 week outpatient rehabilitation program supervised by a physiotherapist. The unsupervised group was given written and pictorial instructions to perform rehabilitation independently at home. OUTCOME MEASURES: The WOMAC, SF-36 mental and physical component scores (MCS and PCS) questionnaires, the UCLA activity rating and the Timed up and Go test (TUG). RESULTS: There were no differences between groups for any measure. Overall differences between the adjusted means were: WOMAC 0.5 (-6.75 to 5.73), SF-36 PCS 0.8 (-6.5 to 8.1), SF-36 MCS 1.7 (-4.1 to 7.4), UCLA 0.3 (5.19 to 6.10) and TUG 0 secs (-1.4 to 1.3). CONCLUSION: Results demonstrated that outcomes in response to rehabilitation after THR are clinically and statistically similar whether the program was supervised or not. The results suggest that early rehabilitation programs can be effectively delivered unsupervised in the home to low-risk patients discharged home after THR. However, the relative effect of late stage rehabilitation was not tested. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12611000167965.

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help