INTRODUCTION: Previous scoring systems for measurement of the quality of outcome are based on scores regarding injuries to individual body regions. Known scores which describe several organ regions are of no importance for trauma patients. Therefore a new rehabilitation outcome evaluation score was developed at our hospital. METHODS: Based on a prospective reinvestigation, a score system was developed that allows a quantitative appraisal of the subjective and objective outcome. A complete physical examination was performed, including ROM, neurologic examination and strength analysis. Part I (113 questions) is to be filled out by the patient; part II (191 questions) focusses on different body regions, physical examination and functional scoring. Included are the MFA, FIM, GCO and Frankel score. A final score (HASPOC) was developed to give a quantitative result of the outcome. RESULTS: The new score has a range from 5 to 411 points. One hundred and fifty patients were re-examined. The mean follow-up time was 2.2 +/- 0.1 years. The SF 12 indicated an outcome more than satisfactory in 63% of cases. The MFA demonstrated moderate or severe restrictions in 41%, in the case of injuries of the lower extremity in 52% of patients. The HASPOC indicated a mean of 44.5 points. CONCLUSION: This paper describes the development, structure, and the quantitative outcome of rehabilitation in polytrauma patients. This standardized rehabilitation instrument deals with a very heterogeneous patient population and shows the rehabilitation deficits accurately. Implemented recognized evaluations allow comparison of these results with those of other scoring systems.
INTRODUCTION: Previous scoring systems for measurement of the quality of outcome are based on scores regarding injuries to individual body regions. Known scores which describe several organ regions are of no importance for traumapatients. Therefore a new rehabilitation outcome evaluation score was developed at our hospital. METHODS: Based on a prospective reinvestigation, a score system was developed that allows a quantitative appraisal of the subjective and objective outcome. A complete physical examination was performed, including ROM, neurologic examination and strength analysis. Part I (113 questions) is to be filled out by the patient; part II (191 questions) focusses on different body regions, physical examination and functional scoring. Included are the MFA, FIM, GCO and Frankel score. A final score (HASPOC) was developed to give a quantitative result of the outcome. RESULTS: The new score has a range from 5 to 411 points. One hundred and fifty patients were re-examined. The mean follow-up time was 2.2 +/- 0.1 years. The SF 12 indicated an outcome more than satisfactory in 63% of cases. The MFA demonstrated moderate or severe restrictions in 41%, in the case of injuries of the lower extremity in 52% of patients. The HASPOC indicated a mean of 44.5 points. CONCLUSION: This paper describes the development, structure, and the quantitative outcome of rehabilitation in polytraumapatients. This standardized rehabilitation instrument deals with a very heterogeneous patient population and shows the rehabilitation deficits accurately. Implemented recognized evaluations allow comparison of these results with those of other scoring systems.
Authors: Suzanne Polinder; Juanita A Haagsma; Eefje Belt; Ronan A Lyons; Vicki Erasmus; Johan Lund; Ed F van Beeck Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2010-12-23 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Lisa Falkenberg; Christian Zeckey; Philipp Mommsen; Marcel Winkelmann; Boris A Zelle; Martin Panzica; Hans-Christoph Pape; Christian Krettek; Christian Probst Journal: Eur J Med Res Date: 2017-10-30 Impact factor: 2.175
Authors: Lily R Mundy; A Jordan Grier; E Hope Weissler; Matthew J Carty; Andrea L Pusic; Scott T Hollenbeck; Mark J Gage Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Date: 2019-05-03