Does follow-up really matter? A convergent mixed methods study exploring follow-up across levels of care in rehabilitation of patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases.

PURPOSE: To explore what patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) need and receive of follow-up care after specialized rehabilitation, and whether received follow-up is associated with health outcomes after 1 year. Further, to compare these findings with patients' experiences to improve the understanding of how follow-up takes place. METHODS: In a mixed methods study, patients received a rehabilitation programme designed to improve the continuity in rehabilitation across care levels. A total of 168 patients completed questionnaires, of which 21 were also interviewed. RESULTS: At discharge, most patients reported needs for follow-up. These needs were largely met within 1 year, mainly resulting from patients' initiatives to re-connect with previous contacts. The degree of received follow-up was not associated with goal attainment, quality of life, or physical function. Factors related to providers (competence, communication skills), context (delays, limited access to care), and patients (motivation, life situation, preferences) seemed to be decisive for the progress of the rehabilitation process over time. CONCLUSIONS: The results provide evidence that access to follow-up care is crucial to patients with RMDs. However, it also highlights several factors that may influence its impact. These results can be used to optimise design and implementation of future follow-up interventions.

Healthcare providers should take greater responsibility for creating continuity in rehabilitation across levels of care.Follow-up care should be adapted to patients' needs, goals, and preferences as regards content, timing, and mode of delivery.Follow-up should be linked to a rehabilitation plan for each patient to ensure continuity of care.More effective communication systems across service levels should be established.

Bridging gaps across levels of care in rehabilitation of patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases: Results from a stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of a structured goal-setting and tailored follow-up rehabilitation intervention with existing rehabilitation in patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases. DESIGN: A pragmatic stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial. SETTING: Eight rehabilitation centers in secondary healthcare, Norway. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 374 adults with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases were included in either the experimental (168) or the control group (206). INTERVENTIONS: A new rehabilitation intervention which comprised structured goal setting, action planning, motivational interviewing, digital self-monitoring of goal progress, and individual follow-up support after discharge according to patients' needs and available resources in primary healthcare (the BRIDGE-intervention), was compared to usual care. MAIN MEASURES: Patient-reported outcomes were collected electronically on admission and discharge from rehabilitation, and after 2, 7, and 12 months. The primary outcome was patients' goal attainment measured by the Patient Specific Functional Scale (0-10, 10 best) at 7 months. Secondary outcome measures included physical function (30-s Sit-To-Stand test), health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-5L-index), and self-assessed health (EQ-VAS). The main statistical analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis using linear mixed models. RESULTS: No significant treatment effects of the BRIDGE-intervention were found for either primary (Patient Specific Functional Scale mean difference 0.1 [95% CI: -0.5, 0.8], p = 0.70), or secondary outcomes 7 months after rehabilitation. CONCLUSION: The BRIDGE-intervention was not shown to be more effective than existing rehabilitation for patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases. There is still a need for more knowledge about factors that can improve the quality, continuity, and long-term health effects of rehabilitation for this patient group.

Structured Goal Planning and Supportive Telephone Follow-up in Rheumatology Care: Results From a Pragmatic, Stepped-Wedge, Cluster-Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate patient-reported health effects of an add-on structured goal-planning and supportive telephone follow-up rehabilitation program compared with traditional rehabilitation programs in patients with rheumatic diseases. METHODS: In this pragmatic stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized, controlled trial, 389 patients with rheumatic diseases recruited from 6 rehabilitation centers received either traditional rehabilitation or traditional rehabilitation extended with an add-on program tailored to individual needs. The add-on program comprised a self-management booklet, motivational interviewing in structured individualized goal planning, and 4 supportive follow-up phone calls after discharge. Data were collected by questionnaires on admission and discharge from rehabilitation stay, and at 6 months and 12 months after discharge. The primary outcome was health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measured by the Patient Generated Index (range 0-100, where 0 = low). Secondary outcomes included patient-reported health status, self-efficacy, pain, fatigue, global disease activity, and motivation for change. The main statistical analysis was a linear repeated measures mixed model performed on the intent-to-treat population using all available data. RESULTS: A significant treatment effect of the add-on intervention on HRQoL was found on discharge (mean difference 3.32 [95% confidence interval 0.27, 6.37]; P = 0.03). No significant between-group differences were found after 6 or 12 months. Both groups showed positive changes in HRQoL following rehabilitation, which gradually declined, although the values remained at higher levels after 6 and 12 months compared with baseline values. CONCLUSION: The add-on program enhanced the short-term effect of rehabilitation with respect to patient-specific HRQoL, but it did not prolong the effect as intended.

Aiming for a healthier life: a qualitative content analysis of rehabilitation goals in patients with rheumatic diseases.

PURPOSE: To explore and describe rehabilitation goals of patients with rheumatic diseases during rehabilitation stays, and examine whether goal content changed from admission to discharge. METHOD: Fifty-two participants were recruited from six rehabilitation centers in Norway. Goals were formulated by the participants during semi-structured goal-setting conversations with health professionals trained in motivational interviewing. An inductive qualitative content analysis was conducted to classify and quantify the expressed goals. Changes in goal content from admission to discharge were calculated as percentage differences. Goal content was explored across demographic and contextual characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 779 rehabilitation goals were classified into 35 categories, within nine overarching dimensions. These goals varied and covered a wide range of topics. Most common at admission were goals concerning healthy lifestyle, followed by goals concerning symptoms, managing everyday life, adaptation, disease management, social life, and knowledge. At discharge, goals about knowledge and symptoms decreased considerably, and goals about healthy lifestyle and adaptation increased. The health profession involved and patient gender influenced goal content. CONCLUSIONS: The rehabilitation goals of the patients with rheumatic diseases were found to be wide-ranging, with healthy lifestyle as the most prominent focus. Goal content changed between admission to, and discharge from, rehabilitation stays. Implications for rehabilitation Rehabilitation goals set by patients with rheumatic diseases most frequently concern healthy lifestyle changes, yet span a wide range of topics. Patient goals vary by gender and are influenced by the profession of the health care worker involved in the goal-setting process. To meet the diversity of patient needs, health professionals need to be aware of their potential influence on the actual goal-setting task, which may limit the range of topics patients present when they are asked to set rehabilitation goals. The proposed framework for classifying goal content has the capacity to detect changes in goals occurring during the rehabilitation process, and may be used as a clinical tool during goal-setting conversations for this patient group.