Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33455931›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2021

Participatory health through behavioural engagement and disruptive digital technology for postoperative rehabilitation: protocol of the PATHway trial.

Xia Wang, David J Hunter, Sarah Robbins, Sarah Capistrano, Vicky Duong, Luciano Melo, Anthony Harris, Manuela Ferreira

Abstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Xia WangInstitute of Bone and Joint Research, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia xia.wang@sydney.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0003-3172-9390
David J HunterDepartment of Rheumatology, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3197-752X
Sarah RobbinsInstitute of Bone and Joint Research, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Sarah CapistranoInstitute of Bone and Joint Research, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Vicky DuongInstitute of Bone and Joint Research, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Luciano MeloResearch Assets Division, Sax Institute, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Anthony HarrisCentre for Health Economics, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Manuela FerreiraUniversity of Sydney Institute of Bone and Joint Research, Saint Leonards, New South Wales, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPostsurgical rehabilitation is critical for optimal recovery in people undergoing orthopaedic surgery. Currently, knee and lumbar spine postsurgical care is not standardised, economically sustainable, nor based on quality evidence, contributing to substantial clinical variation, poor outcomes and increasing healthcare costs. This protocol describes the design of a randomised controlled trial aiming to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a postsurgical clinical pathway augmented by disruptive technology and compared with standardised rehabilitation alone, in decreasing pain and improving function after total knee replacement (TKR) or lumbar laminectomy (with or without fusion).

methodsAn assessor-blinded, parallel group, randomised controlled trial will be conducted to recruit 204 consenting participants (102 per arm) of whom 50% are undergoing TKR and 50% lumbar surgery. The intervention group will receive a 6-month technology-enabled rehabilitation package in addition to usual postsurgical care. The package includes (1) an exercise program delivered via the Physitrack app on the iPad, (2) a health-coaching program delivered via video calls and motivational messages, (3) use of physical activity tracker with goal setting and motivational reminders (Fitbit). For those undergoing TKR, the intervention will also include knee joint range of motion self-monitoring via the Goniometer app. The control group will receive usual postsurgical care. Participants will be followed up at 3, 6 and 12 months from the enrolment date. The primary outcome is pain measured with the Numerical Rating Scale at 3 months. Secondary outcomes include pain-related disability, quality of life, computer self-efficacy, physical activity participation and sedentary behaviour. Data analysis will be blinded and by intention-to-treat. A trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis will determine the potential incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This protocol is approved by the human research ethics committee of the University of Sydney. Dissemination will occur through lay summary, infographics, conferences and journal publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12618001448235.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, KneeDisruptive TechnologyCost-Benefit AnalysisDigital TechnologyHumansQuality of LifeRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment Outcomekneerehabilitation medicinespinetelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID33455931
PMCPMC7813372

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.