OBJECTIVE: To compare hospital and home settings for the rehabilitation of patients following hip fracture. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial comparing accelerated discharge and home-based rehabilitation (n = 34) with conventional hospital care (n = 32) for patients admitted to hospital with hip fracture. SETTING:Three metropolitan hospitals in Adelaide, Australia. SUBJECTS:Sixty-six patients with fractured hip. INTERVENTIONS: Patients assigned to the home-based rehabilitation group were discharged within 48 hours of randomization. The project team therapists made visits to the patient's home and negotiated a set of realistic, short-term and measurable treatment goals with both the patient and carer. Those randomized to usual care remained in hospital for conventional rehabilitation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Physical and social dependence, balance confidence, quality of life, carer strain, patient and carer satisfaction, use of community services and incidence of adverse events such as re-admission and falls. RESULTS: While there was no difference between the groups for all measures of quality of life, patients in the accelerated discharge and home-based rehabilitation group recorded a greater improvement in MBI from randomization (p < 0.05) and scored higher on the Falls Efficacy Scale (p < 0.05) at four months. There was no difference in falls rates. Patients in the home-based rehabilitation group had a shorter stay in hospital (p < 0.05) but a longer stay in rehabilitation overall (p < 0.001). The groups were comparable on the rate and length of admissions after discharge, use of community services, need for carer input and contact with general practitioner (GP) after discharge. CONCLUSIONS: This trial further supports the practice of accelerated discharge from hospital and home-based rehabilitation in selected patients recovering from hip fracture. Such a practice appears to improve physical independence and confidence in avoiding subsequent falls which may have implications for longevity and overall quality of life.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To compare hospital and home settings for the rehabilitation of patients following hip fracture. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial comparing accelerated discharge and home-based rehabilitation (n = 34) with conventional hospital care (n = 32) for patients admitted to hospital with hip fracture. SETTING: Three metropolitan hospitals in Adelaide, Australia. SUBJECTS: Sixty-six patients with fractured hip. INTERVENTIONS:Patients assigned to the home-based rehabilitation group were discharged within 48 hours of randomization. The project team therapists made visits to the patient's home and negotiated a set of realistic, short-term and measurable treatment goals with both the patient and carer. Those randomized to usual care remained in hospital for conventional rehabilitation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Physical and social dependence, balance confidence, quality of life, carer strain, patient and carer satisfaction, use of community services and incidence of adverse events such as re-admission and falls. RESULTS: While there was no difference between the groups for all measures of quality of life, patients in the accelerated discharge and home-based rehabilitation group recorded a greater improvement in MBI from randomization (p < 0.05) and scored higher on the Falls Efficacy Scale (p < 0.05) at four months. There was no difference in falls rates. Patients in the home-based rehabilitation group had a shorter stay in hospital (p < 0.05) but a longer stay in rehabilitation overall (p < 0.001). The groups were comparable on the rate and length of admissions after discharge, use of community services, need for carer input and contact with general practitioner (GP) after discharge. CONCLUSIONS: This trial further supports the practice of accelerated discharge from hospital and home-based rehabilitation in selected patients recovering from hip fracture. Such a practice appears to improve physical independence and confidence in avoiding subsequent falls which may have implications for longevity and overall quality of life.
Authors: Brian R Englum; Cassandra Villegas; Oluwaseyi Bolorunduro; Elliott R Haut; Edward E Cornwell; David T Efron; Adil H Haider Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2011-09-29 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: K Renerts; K Fischer; B Dawson-Hughes; E J Orav; G Freystaetter; H-P Simmen; H-C Pape; A Egli; R Theiler; H A Bischoff-Ferrari Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2019-02-09 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Sasha Shepperd; Helen Doll; Robert M Angus; Mike J Clarke; Steve Iliffe; Lalit Kalra; Nicoletta Aimonio Ricauda; Vittoria Tibaldi; Andrew D Wilson Journal: CMAJ Date: 2009-01-20 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Daniela C Gonçalves-Bradley; Steve Iliffe; Helen A Doll; Joanna Broad; John Gladman; Peter Langhorne; Suzanne H Richards; Sasha Shepperd Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2017-06-26