The Effectiveness and Efficiency of Inpatient Rehabilitation Services in Thailand: A Prospective Multicenter Study

IF 2.3 Q1 REHABILITATION Rehabilitation Process and Outcome Pub Date : 2016-01-01 DOI:10.4137/RPO.S34816
V. Kuptniratsaikul, P. Wattanapan, Ubonwon Wathanadilokul, K. Sukonthamarn, Pranee Lukkanapichonchut, K. Ingkasuthi, P. Massakulpan, J. Klaphajone, S. Suethanapornkul, Punjama Tunwattanapong, W. Laksanakorn, Pitagorn Thamronglaohaphan, W. Leelasamran, Wuttiganok Wangno
{"title":"The Effectiveness and Efficiency of Inpatient Rehabilitation Services in Thailand: A Prospective Multicenter Study","authors":"V. Kuptniratsaikul, P. Wattanapan, Ubonwon Wathanadilokul, K. Sukonthamarn, Pranee Lukkanapichonchut, K. Ingkasuthi, P. Massakulpan, J. Klaphajone, S. Suethanapornkul, Punjama Tunwattanapong, W. Laksanakorn, Pitagorn Thamronglaohaphan, W. Leelasamran, Wuttiganok Wangno","doi":"10.4137/RPO.S34816","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective To investigate the effectiveness and efficiency of inpatient rehabilitation. Methods A total of 2,081 patients across 14 hospitals were recruited in this prospective, multicenter cohort study. Data on the diagnoses, types of admission, length of stay (LOS), and functional ability score based on a modified Barthel index (BI) at admission (BIa) and at discharge (BId) were collected. Effectiveness was defined as the difference of BI (ΔBI) and efficiency as ΔBI divided by LOS. Results The majority of patients were diagnosed with spinal cord injury and stroke (41.8% and 37.5%, respectively). The mean age was 52.4 ± 18.6 years with a mean LOS of 23.9 ± 19.9 days, BIa of 9.4 ± 6.1, and BId of 12.3 ± 5.7. The overall effectiveness and efficiency were 2.9 ± 3.4 and 0.16 ± 0.30 scores/day, respectively; stroke rehabilitation provided the most effective and efficient BI improvement compared with rehabilitation for other diseases. Most patients (54.5%) received intensive functional rehabilitation, which was the most effective and efficient program (4.4 ± 3.6 and 0.23 ± 0.32 scores/day, respectively); the efficiency of the intensive program was not different among various diseases (P = 0.726). Conclusion Stroke rehabilitation had the highest efficiency compared with rehabilitation for other neurological diseases. The most efficient type of admission was intensive rehabilitation, regardless of the disease being treated.","PeriodicalId":41347,"journal":{"name":"Rehabilitation Process and Outcome","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.4137/RPO.S34816","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rehabilitation Process and Outcome","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4137/RPO.S34816","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Objective To investigate the effectiveness and efficiency of inpatient rehabilitation. Methods A total of 2,081 patients across 14 hospitals were recruited in this prospective, multicenter cohort study. Data on the diagnoses, types of admission, length of stay (LOS), and functional ability score based on a modified Barthel index (BI) at admission (BIa) and at discharge (BId) were collected. Effectiveness was defined as the difference of BI (ΔBI) and efficiency as ΔBI divided by LOS. Results The majority of patients were diagnosed with spinal cord injury and stroke (41.8% and 37.5%, respectively). The mean age was 52.4 ± 18.6 years with a mean LOS of 23.9 ± 19.9 days, BIa of 9.4 ± 6.1, and BId of 12.3 ± 5.7. The overall effectiveness and efficiency were 2.9 ± 3.4 and 0.16 ± 0.30 scores/day, respectively; stroke rehabilitation provided the most effective and efficient BI improvement compared with rehabilitation for other diseases. Most patients (54.5%) received intensive functional rehabilitation, which was the most effective and efficient program (4.4 ± 3.6 and 0.23 ± 0.32 scores/day, respectively); the efficiency of the intensive program was not different among various diseases (P = 0.726). Conclusion Stroke rehabilitation had the highest efficiency compared with rehabilitation for other neurological diseases. The most efficient type of admission was intensive rehabilitation, regardless of the disease being treated.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
泰国住院康复服务的有效性和效率:一项前瞻性多中心研究
目的探讨住院康复的效果和效果。方法在这项前瞻性、多中心队列研究中,共招募了来自14家医院的2081名患者。收集诊断、入院类型、住院时间(LOS)和基于改良Barthel指数(BI)的入院(BIa)和出院(BId)功能评分数据。有效性定义为BI (ΔBI)之差,效率定义为ΔBI除以LOS。结果以脊髓损伤和脑卒中为主(分别为41.8%和37.5%)。平均年龄52.4±18.6岁,平均LOS 23.9±19.9天,BIa 9.4±6.1,BId 12.3±5.7。总有效率和总有效率分别为2.9±3.4分/天和0.16±0.30分/天;与其他疾病的康复相比,脑卒中康复提供了最有效和最有效的BI改善。大多数患者(54.5%)接受强化功能康复治疗,这是最有效和最有效的方案(分别为4.4±3.6分和0.23±0.32分/天);强化治疗的效果在不同疾病间无显著差异(P = 0.726)。结论脑卒中康复治疗效果优于其他神经系统疾病的康复治疗。最有效的入院类型是强化康复,无论正在治疗的疾病是什么。
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 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
4
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊最新文献
Advances in Rehabilitation Science and Practice (AdvRSP) Editorial: A Journal Showcasing Exciting Developments in the Field of Rehabilitation in Medical Conditions. Remote Delivery of Service: A Survey of Occupational Therapists' Perceptions. Bioelectrical Impedance Vector Pattern and Biomarkers of Physical Functioning of Prostate Cancer Survivors in Rehabilitation. Safety, Feasibility, and Acceptability of a New Virtual Rehabilitation Platform: A Supervised Pilot Study. The Potential of Computer Vision-Based Marker-Less Human Motion Analysis for Rehabilitation.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1