Bobath therapy is inferior to task-specific training and not superior to other interventions in improving arm activity and arm strength outcomes after stroke: a systematic review.

QUESTION: What is the effect of Bobath therapy on arm activity and arm strength compared with a dose-matched comparison intervention or no intervention after stroke? DESIGN: Systematic review of randomised trials with meta-analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Adults after stroke. INTERVENTION: Bobath therapy compared with no intervention or other interventions delivered at the same dose as the Bobath therapy. OUTCOME MEASURES: Arm activity outcomes and arm strength outcomes. Trial quality was assessed with the PEDro scale. RESULTS: Thirteen trials were included; all compared Bobath with another intervention, which were categorised as: task-specific training (five trials), arm movements (five trials), robotics (two trials) and mental practice (one trial). The PEDro scale scores ranged from 5 to 8. Pooled data from five trials indicated that Bobath therapy was less effective than task-specific training for improving arm activities (SMD -1.07, 95% CI -1.59 to -0.55). Pooled data from five trials indicated that Bobath therapy was similar to or less effective than arm movements for improving arm activities (SMD -0.18, 95% CI -0.44 to 0.09). One trial indicated that Bobath therapy was less effective than robotics for improving arm activities and one trial indicated similar effects of Bobath therapy and mental practice on arm activities. For strength outcomes, pooled data from two trials indicated a large benefit of task-specific training over Bobath therapy (SMD -1.08); however, this estimate had substantial uncertainty (95% CI -3.17 to 1.01). The pooled data of three trials indicated that Bobath therapy was less effective than task-specific training for improving Fugl-Meyer scores (MD -7.84, 95% CI -12.99 to -2.69). The effects of Bobath therapy relative to other interventions on strength outcomes remained uncertain. CONCLUSIONS: After stroke, Bobath therapy is less effective than task-specific training and robotics in improving arm activity and less effective than task-specific training on the Fugl-Meyer score. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42021251630.

Economic evaluation of digitally enabled aged and neurological rehabilitation care in the Activity and MObility UsiNg Technology (AMOUNT) trial.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the trial-based cost-effectiveness of the addition of a tailored digitally enabled exercise intervention to usual care shown to be clinically effective in improving mobility in the Activity and MObility UsiNg Technology (AMOUNT) rehabilitation trial compared to usual care alone. DESIGN: Economic evaluation alongside a pragmatic randomized controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: 300 people receiving inpatient aged and neurological rehabilitation were randomized to the intervention (n = 149) or usual care control group (n = 151). MAIN MEASURES: Incremental cost effectiveness ratios were calculated for the additional costs per additional person demonstrating a meaningful improvement in mobility (3-point in Short Physical Performance Battery) and quality-adjusted life years gained at 6 months (primary analysis). The joint probability distribution of costs and outcomes was examined using bootstrapping. RESULTS: The mean cost saving for the intervention group at 6 months was AU$2286 (95% Bootstrapped cost CI: -$11,190 to $6410) per participant; 68% and 67% of bootstraps showed the intervention to be dominant (i.e. more effective and cost saving) for mobility and quality-adjusted life years, respectively. The probability of the intervention being cost-effective considering a willingness to pay threshold of AU$50,000 per additional person with a meaningful improvement in mobility or quality-adjusted life year gained was 93% and 77%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The AMOUNT intervention had a high probability of being cost-effective if decision makers are willing to pay AU$50,000 per meaningful improvement in mobility or per quality-adjusted life year gained, and a moderate probability of being cost-saving and effective considering both outcomes at 6 months post randomization.

Physical therapists demonstrate clinical behaviors consistent with established clinical practice guidelines in managing individuals following amputation.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Investigating physical therapy in amputation management offers insights into clinical practice. This study explores the self-reported clinical practice of physical therapists in amputation management and compares it to established clinical practice guidelines to determine whether physical therapists are delivering care that is considered recommended clinical practice. METHOD: An online survey of Australian physical therapists with limited or extensive experience in managing individuals following amputation. RESULTS: A total of 110 responses were received. The majority of Australian physical therapists (83%) reported their skills were adequate however, reported a lack of professional development opportunities. Physical therapists reported coordinating care with other health and medical professionals across all phases of care. They report providing comprehensive care in the following areas: residual limb management, pain management, falls prevention, education, counselling, psychological and peer support, and discharge planning. The majority of physical therapists were not aware if a comprehensive care plan was in place following a transition of care from a previous health service. DISCUSSION: Overall, physical therapists displayed clinical practice meeting the guidelines across most areas of amputation management. Future research into alternate data collection of clinical practice, and the development of physical therapy-specific clinical practice guidelines is needed.

Effectiveness of home-based exercise for improving physical activity, quality of life and function in older adults after hospitalisation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if home-based exercise programmes for older adults after hospitalisation are effective at improving physical activity, quality of life, activities of daily living (ADL) and mobility compared to no intervention, standard care or centre-based exercise. METHODS: Databases were searched from inception to March 2022. Randomised controlled trials which included home-based exercise in older adults recently discharged from hospital were included. The primary outcome was physical activity. Secondary outcomes were quality of life, ADL performance, mobility, adverse events and hospital readmissions. Two reviewers independently selected relevant studies and extracted data. Quantitative synthesis with meta-analyses using a random-effects model and qualitative synthesis were performed. RESULTS: Ten trials (PEDro score 6-8) were included. Three trials reported on physical activity but meta-analysis was not possible due to heterogeneity. Home-based exercise was more effective than no intervention at improving ADL performance (SMD 0.60, 95% CI 0.03 to 1.17); and standard care at improving quality of life (SMD 0.30, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.49) and mobility (SMD 0.23, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.45). Few and minor adverse events were associated with home-based exercise. CONCLUSION: Based on individual trials, home-based exercise has the potential to improve physical activity compared to no intervention or standard care. Meta-analyses indicate that home-based exercise is more effective than no intervention at improving activities of daily living performance, and standard care at improving mobility and quality of life. It is unclear if home-based exercise is more effective than centre-based exercise at improving these outcomes.

Examining user perspective of an online learning resource for physiotherapists: A mixed methods study of the TRAIN program.

BACKGROUND: Implementing task specific training is a commonly reported challenge for less experienced therapists. A potential method to improve the ability of recent graduate and student therapists is to upskill regarding task specific training via an online education resource. PURPOSE: To evaluate the use and acceptability of the TRAIN program as an online learning resource for physiotherapists. METHODS: Data from Google Analytics was sourced to determine use of the program and details about the users. Users of the TRAIN program were also invited to complete two surveys; prior to beginning and upon completion of the program. The surveys collected information about the demographics of the users, perceptions of usefulness of the online resource and overall sentiment. RESULTS: Almost 6000 new users interacted with the TRAIN modules during the 15-months study period. The surveys indicated a high level of usability (mean score 9/10, SD 1.5) and clinical utility (mean score 8.8/10, SD 1.6) of the TRAIN program. Perceived knowledge and user confidence in implementing task-specific training was higher for those users completing the post compared to those completing the pre-module survey (knowledge 1.9 and confidence 1.7 out of 10 points higher). Recurring comments in the open-ended feedback pertained to the usefulness, clarity, and ease of use of the TRAIN program. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: This study provides preliminary evidence supporting the use and acceptability of the TRAIN program as an online learning resource for physiotherapists. This further contributes to the growing body of literature indicating online learning is generally a well-received teaching tool for physiotherapists.

Feasibility of a Self-Managed, Video-Guided Exercise Program for Community-Dwelling People with Stroke.

BACKGROUND: Ongoing rehabilitation after stroke is limited. Using video-guided exercises, which are implemented with a self-management approach, may be a way to facilitate ongoing exercise in the home environment. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the feasibility of a video-guided exercise program, implemented with a self-management approach for people with stroke. METHODS: A phase I, single-group, clinical trial. The study comprised two phases: in phase one, four weeks of the program was supported by weekly supervised sessions and in phase two, four weeks of the program was completed without direct supervision. Demographic information was recorded at baseline. Adherence and adverse events were self-reported via a logbook. Acceptability was measured through a purpose-built scale. Physical performance, physical activity, and exercise self-efficacy were measured at baseline and 4 and 8 weeks. RESULTS: Sixteen people with stroke were recruited; however, 14 commenced and completed the study. Adherence during the supervised phase was 3.3 hours per week and 2.3 hours per week during the self-directed phase. There were no adverse events. Most participants indicated that the program was easy to use (92%) and would recommend the program to others (86%). Walking speed improved over the duration of the program (mean difference -0.12 m/s, 95% CI -0.22 to -0.02, p = 0.02). Self-efficacy and physical activity did not change over the duration of the program. CONCLUSION: The findings support the feasibility of a video-guided exercise program for people with stroke. Further research to confirm the effectiveness of this intervention to improve physical function is warranted.

A Brief Intervention to Support Implementation of Telerehabilitation by Community Rehabilitation Services During COVID-19: A Feasibility Study.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has necessitated adoption of telerehabilitation in services where face-to-face consultations were previously standard. We aimed to understand barriers to implementing a telerehabilitation clinical service and design a behavior support strategy for clinicians to implement telerehabilitation. A hybrid implementation study design included pre- and post-intervention questionnaires, identification of key barriers to implementation using the theoretical domains framework, and development of a targeted intervention. Thirty-one clinicians completed baseline questionnaires identifying key barriers to the implementation of telerehabilitation. Barriers were associated with behavior domains of knowledge, environment, social influences, and beliefs. A 6-week brief intervention focused on remote clinician support, and education was well received but achieved little change in perceived barriers to implementation. The brief intervention to support implementation of telerehabilitation during COVID-19 achieved clinical practice change, but barriers remain. Longer follow-up may determine the sustainability of a brief implementation strategy, but needs to consider pandemic-related stressors.

Bobath therapy is inferior to task-specific training and not superior to other interventions in improving lower limb activities after stroke: a systematic review.

QUESTION: In adults with stroke, does Bobath therapy improve lower limb activity performance, strength or co-ordination when compared with no intervention or another intervention? DESIGN: Systematic review of randomised trials with meta-analyses. PARTICIPANTS: Adults after stroke. INTERVENTION: Bobath therapy compared with another intervention or no intervention. OUTCOME MEASURES: Lower limb activity performance (eg, sit to stand, walking, balance), lower limb strength and lower limb co-ordination. Trial quality was assessed using the PEDro scale. RESULTS: Twenty-two trials were included in the review and 17 in the meta-analyses. The methodological quality of the trials varied, with PEDro scale scores ranging from 2 to 8 out of 10. No trials compared Bobath therapy to no intervention. Meta-analyses estimated the effect of Bobath therapy on lower limb activities compared with other interventions, including: task-specific training (nine trials), combined interventions (four trials), proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (one trial) and strength training (two trials). The pooled data indicated that task-specific training has a moderately greater benefit on lower limb activities than Bobath therapy (SMD 0.48), although the true magnitude of the benefit may be substantially larger or smaller than this estimate (95% CI 0.01 to 0.95). Bobath therapy did not clearly improve lower limb activities more than a combined intervention (SMD -0.06, 95% CI -0.73 to 0.61) or strength training (SMD 0.35, 95% CI -0.37 to 1.08). In one study, Bobath therapy was more effective than proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation for improving standing balance (SMD -1.40, 95% CI -1.92 to -0.88), but these interventions did not differ on any other outcomes. Bobath therapy did not improve strength or co-ordination more than other interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Bobath therapy was inferior to task-specific training and not superior to other interventions, with the exception of proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation. Prioritising Bobath therapy over other interventions is not supported by current evidence. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019112451.

App-based supplemental exercise in rehabilitation, adherence, and effect on outcomes: a randomized controlled trial.

QUESTION: To determine the uptake of an app-based supplemental exercise programme in a rehabilitation setting and the effect of such a programme on length of stay and function compared to usual care physiotherapy. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial with random allocation and assessor blinding. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 144 individuals with mixed diagnoses (orthopaedic, neurological, reconditioning) admitted for inpatient sub-acute rehabilitation. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomly allocated to usual care physiotherapy (control group) or usual care physiotherapy with the addition of an app-based supplemental exercise programme (intervention group). OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary measure of interest was total supplementary exercise dosage completed by the intervention group. The primary between-group outcome measure was length of stay with secondary measures including walking endurance (Six-Minute Walk Test), walking speed (10-Metre Walk Test), functional mobility (Timed Up and Go Test) and level of disability (Functional Independence Measure). RESULTS: Participants in the intervention group performed 7 minutes (SD: 9) or 49 repetitions (SD: 48) of supplementary exercise using the app each day. There were no differences between the groups for length of stay (mean difference (MD): -0.5 days, 95% confidence interval (CI): -3.2 to 2.2) or change in any secondary functional outcome measures, including walking speed (MD: -0.1 m/s, 95% CI: -0.2 to 0.0) and disability (MD: -0.9, 95% CI: -3.6 to 1.8). CONCLUSION: A small supplementary exercise dose was achieved by participants in the intervention group. However, such a programme did not affect length of stay or functional outcomes when compared to usual care.

An ongoing physiotherapist-led exercise program in residential aged care: Description of participant satisfaction and outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: This study documents aged care residents' outcomes after, and satisfaction with, participation in a rehabilitation program conducted in a co-located gym. METHODS: A mixed-method prospective cohort study was conducted. All residents who attended the program were invited to participate in the study. Demographic information and outcome measures (walking speed, mobility, ability to stand, exercise self-efficacy and health status) were documented on study commencement and again after 6 months. RESULTS: Thirty-eight participants were included with an average age of 83 years (SD 13). The majority of participants (61%) required physical assistance for mobility. Compliance with scheduled sessions was 94%. Most (92%) participants would recommend the program. The majority of participants (55%) experienced improved walking speed as measured by the 5-metre walk test. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that a rehabilitative program can maintain the physical status of aged care residents, despite the common decline in physical performance in this population.

Digitally enabled aged care and neurological rehabilitation to enhance outcomes with Activity and MObility UsiNg Technology (AMOUNT) in Australia: A randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Digitally enabled rehabilitation may lead to better outcomes but has not been tested in large pragmatic trials. We aimed to evaluate a tailored prescription of affordable digital devices in addition to usual care for people with mobility limitations admitted to aged care and neurological rehabilitation. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a pragmatic, outcome-assessor-blinded, parallel-group randomised trial in 3 Australian hospitals in Sydney and Adelaide recruiting adults 18 to 101 years old with mobility limitations undertaking aged care and neurological inpatient rehabilitation. Both the intervention and control groups received usual multidisciplinary inpatient and post-hospital rehabilitation care as determined by the treating rehabilitation clinicians. In addition to usual care, the intervention group used devices to target mobility and physical activity problems, individually prescribed by a physiotherapist according to an intervention protocol, including virtual reality video games, activity monitors, and handheld computer devices for 6 months in hospital and at home. Co-primary outcomes were mobility (performance-based Short Physical Performance Battery [SPPB]; continuous version; range 0 to 3; higher score indicates better mobility) and upright time as a proxy measure of physical activity (proportion of the day upright measured with activPAL) at 6 months. The dataset was analysed using intention-to-treat principles. The trial was prospectively registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12614000936628). Between 22 September 2014 and 10 November 2016, 300 patients (mean age 74 years, SD 14; 50% female; 54% neurological condition causing activity limitation) were randomly assigned to intervention (n = 149) or control (n = 151) using a secure online database (REDCap) to achieve allocation concealment. Six-month assessments were completed by 258 participants (129 intervention, 129 control). Intervention participants received on average 12 (SD 11) supervised inpatient sessions using 4 (SD 1) different devices and 15 (SD 5) physiotherapy contacts supporting device use after hospital discharge. Changes in mobility scores were higher in the intervention group compared to the control group from baseline (SPPB [continuous, 0-3] mean [SD]: intervention group, 1.5 [0.7]; control group, 1.5 [0.8]) to 6 months (SPPB [continuous, 0-3] mean [SD]: intervention group, 2.3 [0.6]; control group, 2.1 [0.8]; mean between-group difference 0.2 points, 95% CI 0.1 to 0.3; p = 0.006). However, there was no evidence of a difference between groups for upright time at 6 months (mean [SD] proportion of the day spent upright at 6 months: intervention group, 18.2 [9.8]; control group, 18.4 [10.2]; mean between-group difference -0.2, 95% CI -2.7 to 2.3; p = 0.87). Scores were higher in the intervention group compared to the control group across most secondary mobility outcomes, but there was no evidence of a difference between groups for most other secondary outcomes including self-reported balance confidence and quality of life. No adverse events were reported in the intervention group. Thirteen participants died while in the trial (intervention group: 9; control group: 4) due to unrelated causes, and there was no evidence of a difference between groups in fall rates (unadjusted incidence rate ratio 1.19, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.83; p = 0.43). Study limitations include 15%-19% loss to follow-up at 6 months on the co-primary outcomes, as anticipated; the number of secondary outcome measures in our trial, which may increase the risk of a type I error; and potential low statistical power to demonstrate significant between-group differences on important secondary patient-reported outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed improved mobility in people with a wide range of health conditions making use of digitally enabled rehabilitation, whereas time spent upright was not impacted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was prospectively registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Register; ACTRN12614000936628.

App-based supplemental exercise during inpatient orthopaedic rehabilitation increases activity levels: a pilot randomised control trial.

BACKGROUND: There is a known positive relationship between time in therapy and therapy outcomes. Effective rehabilitation should therefore include larger doses of therapy. However, individuals participating in inpatient rehabilitation have low levels of activity throughout the day. This level of inactivity may limit rehabilitation potential. New technologies which deliver personalised exercise programs and track time spent on exercises may lead to greater activity levels and therefore improve functional outcomes in rehabilitation. This pilot randomised control trial aimed to investigate whether an app-based supplemental exercise program in orthopaedic rehabilitation will be feasible and acceptable to participants, increase activity levels and improve functional outcomes. METHODS: Participants were randomised to receive supplemental exercise via an app (PTPal™) on a tablet device additional to usual care or usual care alone. Primary outcome measures were participant satisfaction with app-based supplemental exercise, total repetitions of each activity and time in supplemental exercise programs. Secondary measures were 10-m walk test (10MWT), 6-min walk test (6MWT), Timed Up and Go (TUG), Functional Independence Measure and length of stay assessed by a blinded assessor. RESULTS: Twenty individuals admitted into an inpatient private general rehabilitation unit for orthopaedic rehabilitation over a 4-week duration were included in this study. High acceptance of the app-based supplemental exercise program was demonstrated. Those using the app completed an additional 549 exercise repetitions during their admission (694 supplemental app-based repetitions vs 146 supplemental paper-based repetitions in the control group, mean difference [MD] 549, 95% CI 95 to 1002, p = 0.02) and an additional 157 min in supplemental exercise throughout their admission (195.3 min vs 38.7 min, MD 157 min, 95% CI 0.9-312.3 min, p = 0.05). There was insufficient power to demonstrate statistical significance in functional outcomes, but a trend towards improved functional outcomes was observed in the intervention group. CONCLUSION: An app-based exercise program increases activity levels, is feasible and is a safe intervention with the potential to improve functional outcomes. This pilot study should be followed with a larger study powered to demonstrate functional effects with more participants having greater impairment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR); trial number ACTRN12617000817347. This study was retrospectively registered (registration date 05/06/2017).

Observations of Activity Levels in a Purpose-Built, Inpatient, Rehabilitation Facility.

BACKGROUND: Effective rehabilitation should include high levels of physical activity. The impact of the environmental design on activity levels has had minimal consideration. PURPOSE: This study investigates activity levels of inpatients undergoing rehabilitation in a new rehabilitation facility with innovative design and multidisciplinary care, comparing weekday and weekend activity levels, as well as changes over a 12-month period. METHOD: An observational study reporting participants' location, people present, body position, and activity type on 2 weekdays and 1 weekend day using behavior mapping techniques. Fifteen participants were observed in a mixed rehabilitation unit with neurological, orthopedic, and other health conditions. RESULTS: Results were calculated as the proportion of observations participants spent in each location, position, and performing activities (physical, cognitive, social), and time spent alone and inactive. On average, participants were engaged in activity for 86% (standard deviation [SD] = 9) of the day, with physical activity accounting for 51% (SD = 11), cognitive activity 28% (SD = 10), and social activity 42% (SD = 16). There was more physical activity (mean difference [MD] 8% absolute, confidence interval [CI] = [4, 12], p < .01) and less social activity (MD -6% absolute, CI [-11, -1], p = .02) on weekdays compared to weekends. Overall, participants were alone and inactive for 12% (SD = 9) of the day. Participants observed in 2016 displayed similar results to those observed in 2015. CONCLUSION: High levels of activity were achieved in this facility that underwent environmental redesign, construction of new facilities, and implementation of evidence-based strategies.

Dual-Task Walking Performance in Older Persons With Hearing Impairment: Implications for Interventions From a Preliminary Observational Study.

OBJECTIVES: Adults with "hearing loss" have an increased falls risks. There may be an association between hearing impairment and walking performance under dual-task (DT) and triple-task (TT) conditions. The aim of this study was to identify DT and TT effects on walking speed, step length, and cadence in adults with hearing impairment, previous falls, and physical limitations. DESIGN: The observational study included 73 community-dwelling older people seeking audiology services. Data were collected on sociodemographic characteristics, previous falls, fear of falling, physical limitations, and walking performance under three task conditions. Differences between the task conditions (single task [ST], DT, and TT) and the hearing groups were analyzed with a two-way ANOVA with repeated measures. The influence of fall risks and limited physical functioning on walking under ST, DT, and TT conditions was analyzed with ANOVAs, with ST, DT, and TT performance as repeated measurement factor (i.e., walking speed, step length and Cadence × Previous falls, or short physical performance battery <12 × Hearing Groups). RESULTS: Walking speed was reduced accompanied by decreased step length and increased cadence in people with more severe hearing loss. Larger negative effects on DT and TT walking were found with increasing hearing loss (speed and cadence decreased with higher DT costs). Highest DT costs were found for the walking-manual conditions. These results were accompanied by small effects of older age and more comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: This first screening data of walking performance under different conditions for people with hearing loss warrants the need for development and investigation of training interventions to improve walking abilities. DT training may be beneficial to enhance motor and cognitive flexibility and to reduce fall risks.

Feasibility of a Nurse-Led Weekend Group Exercise Program for People after Stroke.

Background. Additional physical activity including repetitive task practice can improve outcomes after stroke. The additional practice can be facilitated by therapists and family members or could also be delivered by nursing staff. Objective. To investigate the feasibility of a nurse-led weekend exercise program after stroke. Participants. Individuals after stroke, who participated in a weekend exercise program during their hospital admission. Methods. A retrospective audit of the number of referrals to and amount of exercise repetitions achieved in a nurse-led weekend exercise program was undertaken. The weekend exercise program occurs on each Saturday and Sunday for one hour. The repetitions of exercise completed during each class were documented by staff. An audit was conducted to ascertain the amount and type of exercise completed within the class. Results. During the study period 284 people were referred to the exercise program. The mean number of exercise repetitions completed per participant in each class was 180.7 (SD 205.4). The number of exercise repetitions completed by participants was highly variable ranging from 0 to 1190 per class. Conclusion. The amount of average exercise repetitions completed in the Weekend Warrior program was large but with significant variability. A nurse-led exercise class is a feasible method of delivering exercise opportunities to individuals in hospital after stroke.

Effect of affordable technology on physical activity levels and mobility outcomes in rehabilitation: a protocol for the Activity and MObility UsiNg Technology (AMOUNT) rehabilitation trial.

INTRODUCTION: People with mobility limitations can benefit from rehabilitation programmes that provide a high dose of exercise. However, since providing a high dose of exercise is logistically challenging and resource-intensive, people in rehabilitation spend most of the day inactive. This trial aims to evaluate the effect of the addition of affordable technology to usual care on physical activity and mobility in people with mobility limitations admitted to inpatient aged and neurological rehabilitation units compared to usual care alone. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A pragmatic, assessor blinded, parallel-group randomised trial recruiting 300 consenting rehabilitation patients with reduced mobility will be conducted. Participants will be individually randomised to intervention or control groups. The intervention group will receive technology-based exercise to target mobility and physical activity problems for 6 months. The technology will include the use of video and computer games/exercises and tablet applications as well as activity monitors. The control group will not receive any additional intervention and both groups will receive usual inpatient and outpatient rehabilitation care over the 6-month study period. The coprimary outcomes will be objectively assessed physical activity (proportion of the day spent upright) and mobility (Short Physical Performance Battery) at 6 months after randomisation. Secondary outcomes will include: self-reported and objectively assessed physical activity, mobility, cognition, activity performance and participation, utility-based quality of life, balance confidence, technology self-efficacy, falls and service utilisation. Linear models will assess the effect of group allocation for each continuously scored outcome measure with baseline scores entered as a covariate. Fall rates between groups will be compared using negative binomial regression. Primary analyses will be preplanned, conducted while masked to group allocation and use an intention-to-treat approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol has been approved by the relevant Human Research Ethics Committees and the results will be disseminated widely through peer-reviewed publication and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12614000936628. Pre-results.

After-hours or weekend rehabilitation improves outcomes and increases physical activity but does not affect length of stay: a systematic review.

QUESTION: In adults undergoing inpatient rehabilitation, does additional after-hours rehabilitation decrease length of stay and improve functional outcome, activities of daily living performance and physical activity? DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised trials. PARTICIPANTS: Adults participating in an inpatient rehabilitation program. INTERVENTION: Additional rehabilitation provided after hours (evening or weekend). OUTCOME MEASURES: Function was measured with tests such as the Motor Assessment Scale, 10-m walk test, the Timed Up and Go test, and Berg Balance Scale. Performance on activities of daily living was measured with the Barthel index or the Functional Independence Measure. Length of stay was measured in days. Physical activity levels were measured as number of steps or time spent upright. Standardised mean differences (SMD) or mean differences (MD) were used to combine these outcomes. Adverse events were summarised using relative risks (RR). Study quality was assessed using PEDro scores. RESULTS: Seven trials were included in the review. All trials had strong methodological quality, scoring 8/10 on the PEDro scale. Among the measures of function, only balance showed a significant effect: the MD was 14 points better (95% CI 5 to 23) with additional after-hours rehabilitation on a 0-to-56-point scale. The improvement in activities of daily living performance with additional after-hours rehabilitation was of borderline statistical significance (SMD 0.10, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.21). Hospital length of stay did not differ significantly (MD -1.8 days, 95% CI -5.1 to 1.6). Those receiving additional rehabilitation had significantly higher step counts and spent significantly more time upright. Overall, the risk of adverse events was not increased by the provision of after-hours or weekend rehabilitation (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.10). CONCLUSION: Additional after-hours rehabilitation can increase physical activity and may improve activities of daily living, but does not seem to affect the hospital length of stay. REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42014007648. [Scrivener K, Jones T, Schurr K, Graham PL, Dean CM (2015) After-hours or weekend rehabilitation improves outcomes and increases physical activity but does not affect length of stay: a systematic review.Journal of Physiotherapy61: 61-67].