Cost-effectiveness of an integrated 'fast track' rehabilitation service for multi-trauma patients involving dedicated early rehabilitation intervention programs: design of a prospective, multi-centre, non-randomised clinical trial.

Sevginur Kosar, Henk Am Seelen, Bena Hemmen, Silvia Maa Evers, Peter Rg Brink
{"title":"Cost-effectiveness of an integrated 'fast track' rehabilitation service for multi-trauma patients involving dedicated early rehabilitation intervention programs: design of a prospective, multi-centre, non-randomised clinical trial.","authors":"Sevginur Kosar,&nbsp;Henk Am Seelen,&nbsp;Bena Hemmen,&nbsp;Silvia Maa Evers,&nbsp;Peter Rg Brink","doi":"10.1186/1752-2897-3-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In conventional multi-trauma care service (CTCS), patients are admitted to hospital via the accident & emergency room. After surgery they are transferred to the IC-unit followed by the general surgery ward. Ensuing treatment takes place in a hospital's outpatient clinic, a rehabilitation centre, a nursing home or the community. Typically, each of the CTCS partners may have its own more or less autonomous treatment perspective. Clinical evidence, however, suggests that an integrated multi-trauma rehabilitation approach ('Supported Fast-track multi-Trauma Rehabilitation Service': SFTRS), featuring: 1) earlier transfer to a specialised trauma rehabilitation unit; 2) earlier start of 'non-weight-bearing' training and multidisciplinary treatment; 3) well-documented treatment protocols; 4) early individual goal-setting; 5) co-ordination of treatment between trauma surgeon and physiatrist, and 6) shorter lengths-of-stay, may be more (cost-)effective.This paper describes the design of a prospective cohort study evaluating the (cost-) effectiveness of SFTRS relative to CTCS.</p><p><strong>Methods/design: </strong>The study population includes multi-trauma patients, admitted to one of the participating hospitals, with an Injury Severity Scale score > = 16, complex multiple injuries in several extremities or complex pelvic and/or acetabulum fractures. In a prospective cohort study CTCS and SFTRS will be contrasted. The inclusion period is 19 months. The duration of follow-up is 12 months, with measurements taken at baseline, and at 3,6,9 and 12 months post-injury.Primary outcome measures are 'quality of life' (SF-36) and 'functional health status' (Functional Independence Measure). Secondary outcome measures are the Hospital Anxiety & Depression Scale, the Mini-Mental State Examination as an indicator of cognitive functioning, and the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure measuring the extent to which individual ADL treatment goals are met. Costs will be assessed using the PROductivity and DISease Questionnaire and a cost questionnaire.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The study will yield results on the efficiency of an adapted care service for multi-trauma patients (SFTRS) featuring earlier (and condensed) involvement of specialised rehabilitation treatment. Results will show whether improved SFTRS logistics, combined with shorter stays in hospital and rehabilitation clinic and specialised early rehabilitation training modules are more (cost-) effective, relative to CTCS.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>Current Controlled Trials register (ISRCTN68246661) and Netherlands Trial Register (NTR139).</p>","PeriodicalId":87652,"journal":{"name":"Journal of trauma management & outcomes","volume":"3 ","pages":"1"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/1752-2897-3-1","citationCount":"31","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of trauma management & outcomes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/1752-2897-3-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 31

Abstract

Background: In conventional multi-trauma care service (CTCS), patients are admitted to hospital via the accident & emergency room. After surgery they are transferred to the IC-unit followed by the general surgery ward. Ensuing treatment takes place in a hospital's outpatient clinic, a rehabilitation centre, a nursing home or the community. Typically, each of the CTCS partners may have its own more or less autonomous treatment perspective. Clinical evidence, however, suggests that an integrated multi-trauma rehabilitation approach ('Supported Fast-track multi-Trauma Rehabilitation Service': SFTRS), featuring: 1) earlier transfer to a specialised trauma rehabilitation unit; 2) earlier start of 'non-weight-bearing' training and multidisciplinary treatment; 3) well-documented treatment protocols; 4) early individual goal-setting; 5) co-ordination of treatment between trauma surgeon and physiatrist, and 6) shorter lengths-of-stay, may be more (cost-)effective.This paper describes the design of a prospective cohort study evaluating the (cost-) effectiveness of SFTRS relative to CTCS.

Methods/design: The study population includes multi-trauma patients, admitted to one of the participating hospitals, with an Injury Severity Scale score > = 16, complex multiple injuries in several extremities or complex pelvic and/or acetabulum fractures. In a prospective cohort study CTCS and SFTRS will be contrasted. The inclusion period is 19 months. The duration of follow-up is 12 months, with measurements taken at baseline, and at 3,6,9 and 12 months post-injury.Primary outcome measures are 'quality of life' (SF-36) and 'functional health status' (Functional Independence Measure). Secondary outcome measures are the Hospital Anxiety & Depression Scale, the Mini-Mental State Examination as an indicator of cognitive functioning, and the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure measuring the extent to which individual ADL treatment goals are met. Costs will be assessed using the PROductivity and DISease Questionnaire and a cost questionnaire.

Discussion: The study will yield results on the efficiency of an adapted care service for multi-trauma patients (SFTRS) featuring earlier (and condensed) involvement of specialised rehabilitation treatment. Results will show whether improved SFTRS logistics, combined with shorter stays in hospital and rehabilitation clinic and specialised early rehabilitation training modules are more (cost-) effective, relative to CTCS.

Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials register (ISRCTN68246661) and Netherlands Trial Register (NTR139).

Abstract Image

包含专门早期康复干预方案的综合“快速通道”康复服务对多重创伤患者的成本效益:一项前瞻性、多中心、非随机临床试验的设计
背景:在传统的多重创伤护理服务(CTCS)中,患者是通过急症室入院的。手术后,他们被转移到ic病房,然后是普通外科病房。随后的治疗在医院的门诊部、康复中心、疗养院或社区进行。通常,每个CTCS合作伙伴可能有自己或多或少自主的治疗观点。然而,临床证据表明,综合多创伤康复方法(“支持快速通道多创伤康复服务”:SFTRS)具有以下特点:1)早期转移到专门的创伤康复单位;2)尽早开始“非负重”训练和多学科治疗;3)文件完备的治疗方案;4)早期个人目标设定;5)创伤外科医生和理疗师之间的治疗协调,以及6)缩短住院时间,可能会更具(成本)效益。本文描述了一项前瞻性队列研究的设计,评估SFTRS相对于CTCS的(成本)效益。方法/设计:研究人群包括在其中一家参与研究的医院住院、损伤严重程度评分> = 16、多肢复杂多发损伤或复杂骨盆和/或髋臼骨折的多重创伤患者。在一项前瞻性队列研究中,CTCS和SFTRS将进行对比。纳入期为19个月。随访时间为12个月,分别在基线、损伤后3、6、9和12个月进行测量。主要结局指标是“生活质量”(SF-36)和“功能健康状况”(功能独立性指标)。次要结果测量是医院焦虑和抑郁量表,作为认知功能指标的迷你精神状态检查,以及衡量个人ADL治疗目标达到程度的加拿大职业绩效测量。成本将使用生产率和疾病调查表和成本调查表进行评估。讨论:该研究将得出针对多重创伤患者(SFTRS)的适应性护理服务效率的结果,其特点是早期(和浓缩)参与专门的康复治疗。结果将显示,与CTCS相比,改善SFTRS后勤、缩短住院时间和康复诊所时间以及专门的早期康复培训模块是否更具(成本)效益。试验注册:当前对照试验注册(ISRCTN68246661)和荷兰试验注册(NTR139)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书