Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26497597›Full record

Observational studyBMC musculoskeletal disorders2015

Comparison of patients in three different rehabilitation settings after knee or hip arthroplasty: a natural observational, prospective study.

T Benz, F Angst, P Oesch, R Hilfiker, S Lehmann, C Mueller Mebes, E Kramer, M L Verra

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04923373 (Early Function Recovery in Geriatric Patients With Total Knee Arthroplasty by Telerehabilitation), which is not on this map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT04923373 nacompletednot on this map

Early Function Recovery in Geriatric Patients With Total Knee Arthroplasty by Telerehabilitation

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of RzeszowRan2010 to 2011Enrolled105ConditionsTelerehabilitation, Total Knee Arthoplasty, PhysiotherapyArmstelerehabilitation, standard physiotherapy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Observational
  14. Observational
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

T BenzResearch Department, RehaClinic, Bad Zurzach, Switzerland. t.benz@rehaclinic.ch.
F AngstResearch Department, RehaClinic, Bad Zurzach, Switzerland. f.angst@rehaclinic.ch.
P OeschKliniken Valens, Rehabilitationszentrum Valens, Valens, Switzerland. peter.oesch@kliniken-valens.ch.
R HilfikerSchool of Health Sciences, HES-SO Valais-Wallis, Leukerbad, Switzerland. roger.hilfiker@gmail.com.
S LehmannResearch Department, RehaClinic, Bad Zurzach, Switzerland. s.lehmann@rehaclinic.ch.
C Mueller MebesDepartment of Physiotherapy, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland. christine.mueller@insel.ch.
E KramerKlinik Adelheid, Unterägeri, Switzerland. esther.kramer@klinik-adelheid.ch.
M L VerraDepartment of Physiotherapy, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland. martin.verra@insel.ch.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatients after primary hip or knee replacement surgery can benefit from postoperative treatment in terms of improvement of independence in ambulation, transfers, range of motion and muscle strength. After discharge from hospital, patients are referred to different treatment destination and modalities: intensive inpatient rehabilitation (IR), cure (medically prescribed stay at a convalescence center), or ambulatory treatment (AT) at home. The purpose of this study was to 1) measure functional health (primary outcome) and function relevant factors in patients with hip or knee arthroplasty and to compare them in relation to three postoperative management strategies: AT, Cure and IR and 2) compare the post-operative changes in patient's health status (between preoperative and the 6 month follow-up) for three rehabilitation settings.

methodsNatural observational, prospective two-center study with follow-up. Sociodemographic data and functional mobility tests, Timed Up and Go (TUG) and Iowa Level of Assistance Scale (ILOAS) of 201 patients were analysed before arthroplasty and at the end of acute hospital stay (mean duration of stay: 9.7 days +/- 3.9). Changes in health state were measured with the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) before and 6 months after arthroplasty.

resultsCompared to patients referred for IR and Cure, patients referred for AT were significantly younger and less comorbid. Patients admitted to IR had the highest functional disability before arthroplasty. Before rehabilitation, mean TUG was 40.0 s in the IR group, 33.9 s in the Cure group, and 27.5 s in the AT group, and corresponding mean ILOAS was 16.0, 13.0 and 12.2 (50.0 = worst). At the 6 months follow-up, the corresponding effect sizes of the WOMAC global score were 1.32, 1.87, and 1.51 (>0 means improvement).

conclusionsAge, comorbidity and functional disability are associated with referral for intensive inpatient rehabilitation after hip or knee arthroplasty and partly affect health changes after rehabilitation.

Indexed as

AgedArthroplasty, Replacement, HipArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMobility LimitationProspective StudiesRehabilitation Centers

Identifiers

PMID26497597
PMCPMC4619418

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.