Evaluation of hip precautions following total hip replacement: a before and after study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of hip precautions following total hip replacement (THR) by comparing outcomes of patients who received hip precautions with those who did not. METHODS: Before (phase 1) and after (phase 2) study with two consecutive cohorts of patients. In phase 1, patients were strictly educated about hip precautions. In phase 2, patients were not advised about precautions but encouraged to move as able. The primary outcome was the Oxford Hip Score (measuring pain and function) at three months. Secondary outcomes included Oxford Hip Score, activities of daily living (ADLs) (Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living), sleep (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index), mood (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), and quality of life (QoL) (EQ-5 D). RESULTS: A total 237 participants successfully underwent THR surgery, 118 participants in phase 1 and 119 in phase 2. At three months postoperatively, participants had significantly equivalent Oxford Hip Scores (MD= -0.82, 95% CI: -2.64 to 1.00). No significant differences between the groups were observed at six weeks and three months postoperatively for secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Patients recovered at a similar rate regardless of whether they received hip precautions or not, with no increase in complications observed. The findings lend evidence to support decision-making around the removal of precautions.Implications for rehabilitationThe use of no hip precautions resulted in no additional benefit following primary total hip replacement surgery in terms of functional recovery.Patients who were not prescribed precautions had significantly less pain and greater function during the first week after surgery.Total hip replacement patients had similar outcomes at six weeks and three months postoperatively regardless of whether they received hip precautions or not.The study provides evidence to suggest that hip precautions may not be needed routinely following elective primary total hip replacement.

Hip precautions after total hip replacement and their discontinuation from practice: patient perceptions and experiences.

BACKGROUND: Hip precautions are routinely provided to reduce the risk of dislocation following total hip replacement despite evidence suggesting they provide no additional benefit and may, actually, impede recovery. Our aim was to report the views of patients who had been recruited into a trial comparing outcomes in participants who were prescribed hip precautions with those who were not. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted. Topics explored included experiences and opinions of the service (either hip precautions or no hip precautions), information offered, and equipment provided. Thematic analysis was used to identify and report themes. RESULTS: Six themes were identified: perceived justification, and advantages and disadvantages for the postoperative recovery regime prescribed, perceived risk, and fear of dislocation, adherence to the postoperative regime prescribed, and experiences of adaptive equipment. CONCLUSIONS: Participants who received hip precautions had mixed views about their use: some felt they were restrictive whilst others believed they provided reassurance. Participants who did not receive hip precautions were less anxious about dislocating their hip but were unsure how to progress their rehabilitation. The discontinuation of precautions may decrease patients' fears about dislocation but more guidance from rehabilitation staff about how to move safely during recovery is required.Implications for rehabilitationHip precautions may unnecessarily exacerbate patients' anxieties and fear about dislocation following total hip replacement.Hip precautions impact on patients' recovery both physically and psychologically.Patients should be advised about moving and returning to activities following total hip replacement, whether they receive hip precautions or not.

Behavioural Activation Therapy for Depression after Stroke (BEADS): a study protocol for a feasibility randomised controlled pilot trial of a psychological intervention for post-stroke depression.

BACKGROUND: There is currently insufficient evidence for the clinical and cost-effectiveness of psychological therapies for treating post-stroke depression. METHODS/DESIGN: BEADS is a parallel group feasibility multicentre randomised controlled trial with nested qualitative research and economic evaluation. The aim is to evaluate the feasibility of undertaking a full trial comparing behavioural activation (BA) to usual stroke care for 4 months for patients with post-stroke depression. We aim to recruit 72 patients with post-stroke depression over 12 months at three centres, with patients identified from the National Health Service (NHS) community and acute services and from the voluntary sector. They will be randomly allocated to receive behavioural activation in addition to usual care or usual care alone. Outcomes will be measured at 6 months after randomisation for both participants and their carers, to determine their effectiveness. The primary clinical outcome measure for the full trial will be the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). Rates of consent, recruitment and follow-up by centre and randomised group will be reported. The acceptability of the intervention to patients, their carers and therapists will also be assessed using qualitative interviews. The economic evaluation will be undertaken from the National Health Service and personal social service perspective, with a supplementary analysis from the societal perspective. A value of information analysis will be completed to identify the areas in which future research will be most valuable. DISCUSSION: The feasibility outcomes from this trial will provide the data needed to inform the design of a definitive multicentre randomised controlled trial evaluating the clinical and cost-effectiveness of behavioural activation for treating post-stroke depression. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current controlled trials ISRCTN12715175.

Occupational Therapy in HomEcare Re-ablement Services (OTHERS): results of a feasibility randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to test the feasibility of conducting a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of an intervention targeted at activities of daily living (ADL), delivered by an occupational therapist, in homecare reablement. DESIGN: Feasibility parallel group RCT. SETTING: Single-site local authority homecare reablement service. PARTICIPANTS: People referred for homecare reablement with ability to consent. Exclusion criteria were as follows: inability to speak English, receiving other community therapy services, needing two or more to assist transfer and receiving end-of-life care. CONTROL: 'Usual care' was 6 weeks of homecare reablement delivered by social care workers (no routine health professional input). INTERVENTION: A targeted ADL programme, delivered by an occupational therapist incorporating goal setting, teaching/practising techniques, equipment/adaptations and provision of advice/support. This was in addition to usual care. OUTCOME MEASURES: Aspects of feasibility including eligibility, recruitment, intervention delivery, attrition and suitability and sensitivity of outcome measures. Participant outcomes were personal and extended ADL, quality of life, falls and use of health and social care services. RESULTS: 30 participants were recruited, 15 to each arm, which was 60% of those eligible. Data from 22 (73%) were analysed at 6 months. Of the 15 participants, 13 (86%) received the intervention and were able to set one or more ADL goals. There were improvements from baseline in both groups, although overall improvements were greater in the occupational therapy (OT) intervention group. The biggest threat to feasibility was a change in service configuration during the trial, involving additional occupational therapy input, affecting usual care and recruitment. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the service reconfiguration, it was feasible to recruit and retain participants, deliver the intervention and collect outcome data that were responsive to change. The choice of primary outcome measure remains unclear. A further powered study is feasible and warranted; however, the design will require careful consideration because of ongoing national changes in service configurations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN21710246; Results.

Cognitive Rehabilitation for Attention and Memory in people with Multiple Sclerosis: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial (CRAMMS).

BACKGROUND: People with multiple sclerosis have problems with memory and attention. Cognitive rehabilitation is a structured set of therapeutic activities designed to retrain an individual's memory and other cognitive functions. Cognitive rehabilitation may be provided to teach people strategies to cope with these problems, in order to reduce the impact on everyday life. The effectiveness of cognitive rehabilitation for people with multiple sclerosis has not been established. METHODS: This is a multi-centre, randomised controlled trial investigating the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a group-based cognitive rehabilitation programme for attention and memory problems for people with multiple sclerosis. Four hundred people with multiple sclerosis will be randomised from at least four centres. Participants will be eligible if they have memory problems, are 18 to 69 years of age, are able to travel to attend group sessions and give informed consent. Participants will be randomised in a ratio of 6:5 to the group rehabilitation intervention plus usual care or usual care alone. Intervention groups will receive 10 weekly sessions of a manualised cognitive rehabilitation programme. The intervention will include both restitution strategies to retrain impaired attention and memory functions and compensation strategies to enable participants to cope with their cognitive problems. All participants will receive a follow-up questionnaire and an assessment by a research assistant at 6 and 12 months after randomisation. The primary outcome is the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS) Psychological subscale at 12 months. Secondary outcomes include the Everyday Memory Questionnaire, General Health Questionnaire-30, EQ-5D and a service use questionnaire from participants, and the Everyday Memory Questionnaire-relative version and Carer Strain Index from a relative or friend. The primary analysis will be based on intention to treat. A mixed-model regression analysis of the MSIS Psychological subscale at 12 months will be used to estimate the effect of the group cognitive rehabilitation programme. DISCUSSION: The study will provide evidence regarding the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a group-based cognitive rehabilitation programme for attention and memory problems in people with multiple sclerosis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN09697576 . Registered 14 August 2014.

Interventions to reduce dependency in personal activities of daily living in community dwelling adults who use homecare services: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To identify interventions that aim to reduce dependency in activities of daily living (ADL) in homecare service users. To determine: content; effectiveness in improving ability to perform ADL; and whether delivery by qualified occupational therapists influences effectiveness. DATA SOURCES: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, PsycINFO, OTseeker, PEDro, Web of Science, CIRRIE, and ASSIA. REVIEW METHODS: We included: randomised controlled trials, non-randomised controlled trials and controlled before and after studies. Two reviewers independently screened studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. A narrative synthesis of the findings was conducted. RESULTS: Thirteen studies were included, totalling 4975 participants. Ten (77%) were judged to have risk of bias. Interventions were categorised as those termed 're-ablement' or 'restorative homecare' (n=5/13); and those involving separate components which were not described using this terminology (n=8/13). Content of the intervention and level of health professional input varied within and between studies. Effectiveness on ADL: eight studies included an ADL outcome, five favoured the intervention group, only two with statistical significance, both these were controlled before and after studies judged at high risk of bias. ADL outcome was reported using seven different measures. Occupational therapy: there was insufficient evidence to determine whether involvement of qualified occupational therapists influenced effectiveness. CONCLUSION: There is limited evidence that interventions targeted at personal ADL can reduce homecare service users' dependency with activities, the content of evaluated interventions varies greatly.

Occupational Therapy in HomEcare Re-ablement Services (OTHERS): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Homecare re-ablement services have been developed by local authorities in England in response to the government agenda for health and social care. These services aim to optimize users' independence and ability to cope at home, and reduce the need for ongoing health and social care services. However, there is currently limited evidence and guidance regarding the optimum configuration and delivery of re-ablement services. In particular, the impact of occupational therapy input on service user outcomes has been highlighted as a specific research priority. METHODS/DESIGN: This feasibility randomized controlled trial (RCT) will recruit 50 people from one local authority led homecare re-ablement service in England. Those who provide informed consent will be randomized to receive either usual homecare re-ablement (without routine occupational therapy input) or usual homecare re-ablement plus an enhanced program targeted at activities of daily living (ADL), delivered by an occupational therapist. The primary aim of this study is to assess the feasibility of conducting a further, powered study. The participant outcomes assessed will be independence in personal and extended ADL, health and social care-related quality of life, number of care support hours, falls, acute and residential admissions and use of health and social care services. These will be assessed at two weeks, three months and six months post-discharge from the re-ablement service. DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this is the first RCT of occupational therapy in homecare re-ablement services. The results of this study will lay the foundations for a further powered study. The findings will be relevant to researchers, clinicians, commissioners and users of adult social care services. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials registration number: ISRCTN21710246 (registered on 31March 2014).

Cost-effectiveness of an adjustment group for people with multiple sclerosis and low mood: a randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost effectiveness of a psychological adjustment group shown to be clinically effective in comparison with usual care for people with multiple sclerosis. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial with comparison of costs and calculation of incremental cost effectiveness ratio. SETTING: Community. PARTICIPANTS: People with multiple sclerosis were screened on the General Health Questionnaire 12 and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and those with low mood were recruited. INTERVENTIONS: Participants randomly allocated to the adjustment group received six group treatment sessions. The control group received usual care, which did not include psychological interventions. MAIN MEASURES: Outcomes were assessed four and eight months after randomization, blind to group allocation. The costs were assessed from a service use questionnaire and information provided on medication. Quality of life was assessed using the EQ-5D. RESULTS: Of the 311 patients identified, 221 (71%) met the criteria for having low mood. Of these, 72 were randomly allocated to receive treatment and 79 to usual care. Over eight months follow-up there was a decrease in the combined average costs of £378 per intervention respondent and an increase in the costs of £297 per patient in the control group, which was a significant difference (p=0.03). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio indicated that the cost per point reduction on the Beck depression inventory-II was £118. CONCLUSION: In the short term, the adjustment group programme was cost effective when compared with usual care, for people with multiple sclerosis presenting with low mood. The longer-term costs need to be assessed.

Attendance at a psychological support group for people with multiple sclerosis and low mood.

PURPOSE: A cognitive behavioural group promoting psychological adjustment for people with multiple sclerosis (MS) was found to reduce psychological distress. Not all those offered treatment attended the group sessions. The aims were to examine the rates of attendance and to evaluate feedback from participants. METHOD: Participants with MS and low mood were recruited to a randomized trial comparing attendance at a psychological support group with a usual care control group. The attendance at each session was determined and those who attended were compared with those who failed to attend using a Mann-Whitney U-test or chi-squared. A sample of participants completed a telephone feedback questionnaire to determine their views of the group. RESULTS: The 44 participants who attended four or more sessions were not significantly different from the 28 who attended fewer than four sessions on demographic variables, disability, self-efficacy or quality of life, but significantly fewer men attended than women (p = 0.03). Participants' feedback from the group was mainly positive, and no factors were identified associated with non-attendance. CONCLUSIONS: Men were less likely to attend group treatment sessions than women, but no other variables were associated with non-attendance. Attendance rates influence the effectiveness of interventions and reasons for non-attendance need to be determined.

Evaluation of an adjustment group for people with multiple sclerosis and low mood: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Mood problems affect many people with multiple sclerosis (MS). The aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of a group treatment based on cognitive behavioural principles. METHODS: People with MS were screened on the General Health Questionnaire 12 (GHQ-12) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HAD). Those identified with low mood were invited to take part in a randomized trial comparing the effect of attending an adjustment group with a waiting list control. Patients allocated to the adjustment group received six 2 h group treatment sessions. Outcomes were assessed 4 and 8 months after randomization, blind to group allocation. RESULTS: Of the 311 patients identified, 221 (71%) met the criteria for low mood and 151 (68%) agreed to take part. Hierarchical regression analyses were conducted to compare the two groups, correcting for baseline mood and disability. At 4 months, group allocation alone was a significant predictor of the primary outcome measure, the GHQ-12. At 8 months, group allocation alone was no longer a significant predictor for GHQ-12 scores, but it was when baseline GHQ-12 and Guy's Neurological Disability Scale scores were controlled for. Comparison of the area under the curve revealed significant differences between the groups for GHQ-12 (p = 0.003), HAD Anxiety (p = 0.013), HAD Depression (p = 0.004), Beck Depression Inventory (p = 0.001), MS Self-efficacy (p = 0.037) and MS Impact Scale Psychological (p = 0.012). CONCLUSION: Patients receiving treatment were less distressed and had less depression and anxiety. There was some evidence of improved self-efficacy and a reduction of the impact of MS on people's lives.