The challenges and gains of delivering a home-exercise intervention: a qualitative study of physiotherapists and physiotherapy assistants.

OBJECTIVES: The paper presents insights from the Community based Rehabilitation after Knee Arthroplasty (CORKA) trial. We aimed to explore physiotherapists and physiotherapy assistants' experiences of delivering a home-base exercise intervention following knee replacement surgery. We were particularly interested in the feasibility, potential benefits and barriers of a community-based exercise programme from the perspective of physiotherapists and physiotherapy assistants and to understand any constraints or training needs that arose.  DESIGN: Qualitative thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews.  SETTING: The Community based Rehabilitation after Knee Arthroplasty (CORKA) trial. PARTICIPANTS: Five physiotherapists and six physiotherapy assistants with a range of clinical experience. METHODS: Interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim. We used the stages of reflexive thematic analysis suggested by Braun and Clarke. One researcher conducted the interviewers whilst three researchers with experience in qualitative research methods contributed to the coding and analysis of data. RESULTS: We developed seven themes that help to understand the benefits and challenges of delivering treatment interventions in a person's home: seeing the person in their own world; thinking outside the cubicle;developing people skills; enjoying the above and beyond; treading a fine line between patient and friend; feeling outside my comfort zone; needing a support network. CONCLUSIONS: Treating people in their own homes facilitates a holistic approach. Our findings highlight areas for clinical education: (1) how do we help clinicians to tread the fine line between friend and professional (2) how do we balance the need to provide support and structure with the freedom to work creatively and independently?

The feasibility, acceptability, safety, and effects of early weight bearing in humeral fractures - a scoping review.

PURPOSE: Non-weight bearing is often recommended after humeral fractures. This review aims to summarise the extent and nature of the evidence for the feasibility, acceptability, safety, and effects of early weight bearing (EWB) in people with humeral fractures, treated operatively or non-operatively. . METHODS: Data sources identified published (PUBMED, EMBASE, CINAHL) and unpublished (ClinicalTrials.gov, CENTRAL, NIHR Open Research, OpenGrey) literature. Independent data extraction was conducted by two reviewers. RESULTS: 13 901 records were retrieved. Ten studies, involving 515 post-operative patients and 351 healthcare professionals, were included. EWB was found to be feasible in nine studies. There was limited evidence regarding adherence to EWB. Trauma and orthopaedic surgeons reported that EWB was acceptable. This depended on surgery type and whether it was a post-operative polytrauma case. No acceptability data was reported from patients' perspectives. Only one study reported two patients who developed unsatisfactory outcomes from excessive post-operative EWB. Positive effects of EWB were reported on disability level, pain, shoulder and elbow motion, and union. CONCLUSION: There is some evidence for the feasibility, safety, and effectiveness of post-operative EWB after humeral fractures. There was limited data on the acceptability of EWB. Heterogeneous study designs, and variations in EWB protocols limit conclusions.

There is some evidence to support the feasibility, safety, and effectiveness of early weight bearing following operative management of humeral fractures.Early weight bearing after some humeral fractures is acceptable to some subspecialities of orthopaedic surgeons but is not universally accepted.Rehabilitation professionals should discuss the option of early weight bearing after operative management of humeral fracture with patients and their multidisciplinary team.

Outpatient physiotherapy versus home-based rehabilitation for patients at risk of poor outcomes after knee arthroplasty: CORKA RCT.

BACKGROUND: Over 100,000 primary knee arthroplasty operations are undertaken annually in the UK. Around 15-30% of patients do not report a good outcome. Better rehabilitation strategies may improve patient-reported outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To compare the outcomes from a traditional outpatient physiotherapy model with those from a home-based rehabilitation programme for people assessed as being at risk of a poor outcome after knee arthroplasty. DESIGN: An individually randomised, two-arm controlled trial with a blinded outcome assessment, a parallel health economic evaluation and a nested qualitative study. SETTING: The trial took place in 14 NHS physiotherapy departments. PARTICIPANTS: People identified as being at high risk of a poor outcome after knee arthroplasty. INTERVENTIONS: A multicomponent home-based rehabilitation package delivered by rehabilitation assistants with supervision from qualified therapists compared with usual-care outpatient physiotherapy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the Late Life Function and Disability Instrument at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were the Oxford Knee Score (a disease-specific measure of function); Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score; Quality of Life subscale; Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly; EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version; and physical function assessed using the Figure-of-8 Walk Test, 30-Second Chair Stand Test and Single Leg Stance. Data on the use of health-care services, time off work and informal care were collected using participant diaries. RESULTS: In total, 621 participants were randomised. A total of 309 participants were assigned to the COmmunity based Rehabilitation after Knee Arthroplasty (CORKA) home-based rehabilitation programme, receiving a median of five treatment sessions (interquartile range 4-7 sessions). A total of 312 participants were assigned to usual care, receiving a median of four sessions (interquartile range 2-6 sessions). The primary outcome, Late Life Function and Disability Instrument function total score at 12 months, was collected for 279 participants (89%) in the home-based CORKA group and 287 participants (92%) in the usual-care group. No clinically or statistically significant difference was found between the groups (intention-to-treat adjusted difference 0.49 points, 95% confidence interval -0.89 to 1.88 points; p = 0.48). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in any of the patient-reported or physical secondary outcome measures at 6 or 12 months post randomisation. The health economic analysis found that the CORKA intervention was cheaper to provide than usual care (£66 less per participant). Total societal costs (combining health-care costs and other costs) were lower for the CORKA intervention than usual care (£316 less per participant). Adopting a societal perspective, CORKA had a 75% probability of being cost-effective at a threshold of £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Adopting the narrower health and social care perspective, CORKA had a 43% probability of being cost-effective at the same threshold. LIMITATIONS: The interventions were of short duration and were set within current commissioning guidance for UK physiotherapy. Participants and treating therapists could not be blinded. CONCLUSIONS: This randomised controlled trial found no important differences in outcomes when post-arthroplasty rehabilitation was delivered using a home-based, rehabilitation assistant-delivered rehabilitation package or a traditional outpatient model. However, the health economic evaluation found that when adopting a societal perspective, the CORKA home-based intervention was cost-saving and more effective than, and thus dominant over, usual care, owing to reduced time away from paid employment for this group. Further research could look at identifying the risk of poor outcome and further evaluation of a cost-effective treatment, including the workforce model to deliver it. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN13517704. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 65. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Knee replacement is a common treatment for knee osteoarthritis. Most people do well after surgery; however, a small group of people do not report a good outcome. One way we could try to improve this is by considering the way that rehabilitation is offered after surgery. We identified people thought to be at risk of a poor outcome after knee replacement. We compared a newly designed rehabilitation programme that was undertaken in people's own homes with physiotherapy as it is currently offered. This new programme was delivered by rehabilitation assistants under the guidance of qualified therapists. We assessed these treatments by measuring three functional tests: walking in a figure of eight, sitting and standing from a chair in 30 seconds and standing on one leg. In addition, we asked people to complete questionnaires about their knee, what activities they could perform, how physically active they were and their quality of life. We also recorded the use of health-care services, time off work and any informal care that people received. The results showed that both groups had improved by a similar amount at 6 months and 12 months after surgery. The new rehabilitation programme that was designed for the study was cheaper to deliver than standard physiotherapy, when all costs were considered. We think that future research should look at developing better tools to predict who might be at risk of not doing well after surgery, and to determine the ideal make-up of the rehabilitation team that delivers treatment after knee replacement.

COmmunity-based Rehabilitation after Knee Arthroplasty (CORKA): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The number of knee arthroplasties performed each year is steadily increasing. Although the outcome is generally favourable, up to 15 % fail to achieve a satisfactory clinical outcome which may indicate that the existing model of rehabilitation after surgery may not be the most efficacious. Given the increasing number of knee arthroplasties, the relative limited physiotherapy resources available and the increasing age and frailty of patients receiving arthroplasty surgery, it is important that we concentrate our rehabilitation resources on those patients who most need help to achieve a good outcome. This pragmatic randomised controlled trial will investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a community-based multidisciplinary rehabilitation intervention in comparison to usual care. METHODS/DESIGN: The trial is designed as a prospective, single-blind, two-arm randomised controlled trial (RCT). A bespoke algorithm to predict which patients are at risk of poor outcome will be developed to screen patients for inclusion into a RCT using existing datasets. Six hundred and twenty patients undergoing knee arthroplasty, and assessed as being at risk of poor outcome using this algorithm, will be recruited and randomly allocated to one of two rehabilitation strategies: usual care or an individually tailored community-based rehabilitation package. The primary outcome is the Late Life Function and Disability Instrument measured at 1 year after surgery. Secondary outcomes include the Oxford Knee Score, the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score quality of life subscale, the Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly, the EQ-5D-5L and physical function measured by three performance-based tests: figure of eight, sit to stand and single-leg stand. A nested qualitative study will explore patient experience and perceptions and a health economic analysis will assess whether a home-based multidisciplinary individually tailored rehabilitation package represents good value for money when compared to usual care. DISCUSSION: There is lack of consensus about what constitutes the optimum package of rehabilitation after knee arthroplasty surgery. There is also a need to tailor rehabilitation to the needs of those predicted to do least well by focussing on interventions that target the elderly and frailer population receiving arthroplasty surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 13517704 , registered on 12 February 2015.