Cargando…

Home versus day rehabilitation: a randomised controlled trial

Objective: to assess the effect of home versus day rehabilitation on patient outcomes. Design: randomised controlled trial. Setting: post-hospital rehabilitation. Participants: two hundred and twenty-nine hospitalised patients referred for ambulatory rehabilitation. Interventions: hospital-based day...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Crotty, Maria, Giles, Lynne C., Halbert, Julie, Harding, Julie, Miller, Michelle
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2008
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2582455/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18723862
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afn141
_version_ 1782160670323638272
author Crotty, Maria
Giles, Lynne C.
Halbert, Julie
Harding, Julie
Miller, Michelle
author_facet Crotty, Maria
Giles, Lynne C.
Halbert, Julie
Harding, Julie
Miller, Michelle
author_sort Crotty, Maria
collection PubMed
description Objective: to assess the effect of home versus day rehabilitation on patient outcomes. Design: randomised controlled trial. Setting: post-hospital rehabilitation. Participants: two hundred and twenty-nine hospitalised patients referred for ambulatory rehabilitation. Interventions: hospital-based day rehabilitation programme versus home-based rehabilitation programme. Main Outcome Measures: at 3 months, information was collected on hospital readmission, transfer to residential care, functional level, quality of life, carer stress and carer quality of life. At 6 months, place of residence, hospital re-admissions and mortality status were collected. Results: there were significant improvements in the functional outcomes from baseline to 3 months for all participants. At discharge, carers of patients in day hospital reported higher Caregiver Strain Index (CSI) scores in comparison to home rehabilitation carers (4.95 versus 3.56, P = 0.047). Patients in day hospital had double the risk of readmission compared to those in home rehabilitation (RR = 2.1; 95% CI 1.2–3.9). This effect persisted at 6 months. Conclusions: day hospital patients are more likely to be readmitted to hospital possibly due to increased access to admitting medical staff. This small trial favours the home as a better site for post-hospital rehabilitation.
format Text
id pubmed-2582455
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2008
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-25824552009-02-25 Home versus day rehabilitation: a randomised controlled trial Crotty, Maria Giles, Lynne C. Halbert, Julie Harding, Julie Miller, Michelle Age Ageing Research Papers Objective: to assess the effect of home versus day rehabilitation on patient outcomes. Design: randomised controlled trial. Setting: post-hospital rehabilitation. Participants: two hundred and twenty-nine hospitalised patients referred for ambulatory rehabilitation. Interventions: hospital-based day rehabilitation programme versus home-based rehabilitation programme. Main Outcome Measures: at 3 months, information was collected on hospital readmission, transfer to residential care, functional level, quality of life, carer stress and carer quality of life. At 6 months, place of residence, hospital re-admissions and mortality status were collected. Results: there were significant improvements in the functional outcomes from baseline to 3 months for all participants. At discharge, carers of patients in day hospital reported higher Caregiver Strain Index (CSI) scores in comparison to home rehabilitation carers (4.95 versus 3.56, P = 0.047). Patients in day hospital had double the risk of readmission compared to those in home rehabilitation (RR = 2.1; 95% CI 1.2–3.9). This effect persisted at 6 months. Conclusions: day hospital patients are more likely to be readmitted to hospital possibly due to increased access to admitting medical staff. This small trial favours the home as a better site for post-hospital rehabilitation. Oxford University Press 2008-11 2008-08-23 /pmc/articles/PMC2582455/ /pubmed/18723862 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afn141 Text en © The Author [2008]. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/uk/ The online version of this article has been published under an open access model. Users are entitled to use, reproduce, disseminate, or display the open access version of this article for non-commercial purposes provided that: the original authorship is properly and fully attributed; the Journal and Oxford University Press are attributed as the original place of publication with the correct citation details given; if an article is subsequently reproduced or disseminated not in its entirety but only in part or as a derivative work this must be clearly indicated. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org
spellingShingle Research Papers
Crotty, Maria
Giles, Lynne C.
Halbert, Julie
Harding, Julie
Miller, Michelle
Home versus day rehabilitation: a randomised controlled trial
title Home versus day rehabilitation: a randomised controlled trial
title_full Home versus day rehabilitation: a randomised controlled trial
title_fullStr Home versus day rehabilitation: a randomised controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Home versus day rehabilitation: a randomised controlled trial
title_short Home versus day rehabilitation: a randomised controlled trial
title_sort home versus day rehabilitation: a randomised controlled trial
topic Research Papers
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2582455/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18723862
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afn141
work_keys_str_mv AT crottymaria homeversusdayrehabilitationarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT gileslynnec homeversusdayrehabilitationarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT halbertjulie homeversusdayrehabilitationarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT hardingjulie homeversusdayrehabilitationarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT millermichelle homeversusdayrehabilitationarandomisedcontrolledtrial