Delivering high quality hip fracture rehabilitation: the perspective of occupational and physical therapy practitioners.

AIM: The majority of post-acute hip fracture rehabilitation in the US is delivered in skilled nursing facilities (SNFs). Currently, there are limited guidelines that equip occupational and physical therapy practitioners with a summary of what constitutes evidence-based high quality rehabilitation. Thus, this study aimed to identify rehabilitation practitioners' perspectives on the practices that constitute high quality hip fracture rehabilitation. METHODS: Focus groups were conducted with 99 occupational and physical therapy practitioners working in SNFs in southern California. Purposive sampling of facilities was conducted to capture variation in key characteristics known to impact care delivery for this patient population (e.g., financial resources, staffing, and patient case-mix). Questions aimed to elicit practitioners' perspectives on high quality hip fracture rehabilitation practices. Each session was audio-recorded and transcribed. Data were systematically analyzed using a modified grounded theory approach. RESULTS: Seven themes emerged: objectives of care; first 72 h; positioning, pain, and precautions; use of standardized assessments; episode of care practices; facilitating insight into progress; and interdisciplinary collaboration. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical guidelines are critical tools to facilitate clinical decision-making and achieve desired patient outcomes. The findings of this study highlight the practitioners' perspective on what constitutes high quality hip fracture rehabilitation. This work provides critical information to advance the development of stakeholder-driven rehabilitation clinical guidelines. Future research is needed to verify the findings from other stakeholders (e.g., patients), ensure the alignment of our findings with current evidence, and develop measures for evaluating their delivery and relationship to desired outcomes. Implications for Rehabilitation This study highlights occupational and physiotherapy therapy practitioners' perspectives on the cumulative best practices that reflect high quality care, which should be delivered during hip fracture rehabilitation. While this study was limited to two professions within the broader interdisciplinary team, consistently occupational and physiotherapy therapy practitioners situated their role and practices within the team, emphasizing that high quality care was driven by collaboration among all members of the team as well as the patient and caregivers. Future research needs to evaluate the (a) frequency at which these practices are delivered and the relationship to patient-centered outcomes, and (b) perspectives of rehabilitation practitioners working in other PAC settings, patients, caregivers, as well as the other members of the interdisciplinary PAC team.

Instrumented Test of Sensory Integration for Balance: A Validation Study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Abnormal postural sway is associated with an increase in risk of falls but is difficult for clinicians to accurately quantify without access to laboratory equipment. Instrumenting clinical outcome measures using body-worn movement monitors is a low-cost alternative. This is the first study to compare the modified Clinical Test of Sensory Integration for Balance (i-mCTSIB) to the laboratory test of the Sensory Organization Test (SOT) with dynamic posturography in a group of participants with Parkinson's disease (PD) and subtle balance limitations. The purpose of this study was to (1) determine the concurrent validity of the i-mCTSIB with the SOT (6 and 4 conditions) and (2) compare the i-mCTSIB and the SOT to differentiate between individuals with and without recent falls within the previous 6 months. METHODS: This cross-sectional study examined 26 participants with idiopathic PD who had a Motor Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale score of 32.7 (13.5) out of 108. RESULTS: The composite and conditions 1 and 4 of the i-mCTSIB and SOT scores were significantly correlated: composite scores r = -0.64 (P ≤ .001), C1 r = -0.43 (P = .03), C3 r = -0.60 (P ≤ .01), and C4 r = -0.54 (P ≤ .001). A significant difference was observed in mean i-mCTSIB composite scores between fallers and nonfallers (P = .04). In contrast, the SOT composite was not significantly different between fallers and nonfallers (P = 0.31). DISCUSSION: The results suggest that the i-mCTSIB may be a valid and clinically meaningful measure of sensory organization in persons with PD, even those with mild postural instability as measured by the median Hoehn and Yahr score (2.0). Future research should evaluate predictive validity of the i-mCTSIB for prospective falls. CONCLUSION: The instrumented mCTSIB with portable, body-worn movement allows clinicians to quantify abnormal postural sway without the ceiling effects of clinical balance testing or the expense and importability of force plate technology in the SOT. Instrumenting mCTSIB may also distinguish between fallers and nonfallers.