Recommendations for health care redesign often advocate for comparative effectiveness research that is patient-centered. For patients who require rehabilitation services, a first step in this research process is to understand current practices for specific patient groups.
To document in detail the physical and occupational therapy treatment activities for inpatient hip fracture rehabilitation among 3 patient subgroups distinguished by their early rate of functional recovery between time of surgery to rehabilitation admission.
Multicenter prospective observational cohort, practice-based evidence, study.
Seven skilled nursing facilities and 11 inpatient rehabilitation facilities across the United States.
A total of 226 patients with hip fractures treated with hip arthroplasty.
Comparisons of physical and occupational therapy treatment activities among 3 groups with different initial recovery trajectory (IRT) rates (slower, moderate, faster).
Percent of patients in each IRT group exposed to each physical and occupational therapy activity (exposure), and mean minutes per week for each activity (intensity).
The number of patients exposed to different physical or occupational therapy activities varied within the entire sample. More specifically, among the 3 IRT groups, significant differences in exposure occurred for 44% of physical therapy activities and 39% of occupational therapy activities. More patients in the slower recovery group, IRT 1, received basic activities of daily living treatments and more patients in the faster recovery group, IRT 3, received advanced activities. The moderate recovery group, IRT 2, had some treatments similar to IRT 1 group and others similar to IRT 3 group.
Analyses of practice-based evidence on inpatient rehabilitation of hip fracture patients treated with arthroplasty identified differences in therapy activities among three patient groups classified by IRT rates. These results may enhance physiatrists', other physicians', and rehabilitation teams' understanding of inpatient rehabilitation for these patients and help design future comparative effectiveness research.