Rehabilitation最新文献

Purpose: Restricted access to rehabilitative care due to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic may affect the participation of cancer survivors and risks progression of the underlying disease. The aim of our analyses was to examined the extent to which cancer rehabilitations in Germany decreased due to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

Methods: Data were retrieved from the German Pension Insurance which is the main provider for medical rehabilitation in Germany. We used monthly cross-sectional data on the utilization of cancer rehabilitation (Ca-rehab-services according to section 15 for working-aged people or section 31 social security code VI for pensioners) in 2019 and 2020. We used a difference-in-differences model to determine the reduction in rehabilitation utilization attributable to the pandemic and reported incidence rate ratios (IRR).

Results: We included 146,924 cancer rehabilitations in 2019 and 113,117 cancer rehabilitations in 2020. Compared to the previous year, the nationwide decline in cancer rehabilitations was greatest in April 2020 (63.2%). Utilization of cancer rehabilitation was reduced by 11.5% for benefits according to section 15 social security code VI (IRR=0.885; 95% CI: 0.864 to 0.906) and by 26.5% for benefits according to section 31 (IRR=0.735; 95% CI: 0.717 to 0.754) due to the pandemic. For pensioners the decline in utilization was more pronounced in Western Germany than in Eastern Germany and greater for non-post-acute rehabilitations than for post-acute rehabilitations.

Conclusion: The analyses show a pandemic-related decline in cancer rehabilitations, especially in cancer rehabilitation services for pensioners. Failure to seek medical rehabilitation, through which physical and psychological recovery and relief from disease and treatment side effects can be achieved, will have a lasting impact on the participation for many cancer survivors. Repeated monitoring of work ability and health of chronically ill people could generate necessary data to clarify why people in need of rehabilitation have avoided seeking medical rehabilitation and how they can be supported.

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of clinical trials are considered to represent the highest level of scientific evidence in clinical medicine provided internationally accepted guidelines and checklists are followed.In systematic reviews and meta-analyses all clinical studies focussing a specific predefined clinical question are collected and evaluated. The results of systematic reviews strongly depend on the study protocol, including the exact definition of the population of interest, the therapeutic intervention under consideration and, last not least, the time period of observation. Moreover, evaluating multidisciplinary rehabilitation, its specifications with regard to therapeutic content, intensity and duration, supervision and general framework must be considered for correctly estimating determinants that control therapeutic success or failure.The range of potential risks of bias arising during planning, realization and publication of clinical studies is considerable and needs to be carefully estimated with regard to each single study included in meta-analysis.Taking together, the incremental scientific value of systematic reviews and meta-analyses cannot be taken for granted, but strongly depends on the methodological quality of the clinical studies being included as well as on the systematic process of the meta-analysis and the critical interpretation of the results.

Objectives: In patients with somatic illness and additional mental disorder, not only motor or sensory functions may be impaired, but also psychological capacities. These become more and more important for work ability in our modern working world. There are presently no data about the type and distribution of psychological capacity impairments in patients with comorbid somatic and mental disorders. These data are however important for estimation of diagnostic and therapy requirements.

Methods: 402 orthopedic, cardiological, and neurological patients with additional mental disorders were investigated with a structured clinical assessment for mental disorders (MINI) and psychological capacity impairments (Mini-ICF-APP).

Results: In all three somatic indications at least half of the comorbid patients had any clinically relevant psychological capacity impairment. Neurological patients (67%) and orthopedic patients (72%) were more often affected than cardiological patients (50.5%). Orthopedic patients are slightly more impaired in self-care; neurological and orthopedic patients are more impaired in mobility; and cardiological patients are less impaired in assertiveness.

Conclusion: In comparison of all three somatic patient groups with mental disorders the number of psychological capacity impairments is similar. In contrast to patients with mental disorders only (i. e. those without somatic comorbidity), the psychological impairment quality in comorbid patients may be influenced by the somatic illness. The data from this study are important in order to estimate diagnostic and therapeutic needs, such as capacity training or compensation of psychological capacity impairments.

Purpose: There is little representative evidence for the German rehabilitation system on occupational reintegration after medical rehabilitation. For persons who have undergone rehabilitation on behalf of the German Pension Insurance (GPI) due to a neurological disease, it is therefore important to determine (a) what socio-medical risks exist prior to rehabilitation, (b) how well persons were able to participate in working life after rehabilitation, and (c) what conditions determine the work participation.

Methods: The study is conducted on the basis of the GPI's database of rehabilitation statistics. Included were all persons, who completed medical rehabilitation in 2016 due to a neurological disease. The analyses were carried out for the entire group and also in a differentiated manner for the 2 main diseases, cerebrovascular diseases (CD) and multiple sclerosis (MS). Work participation was operationalized both via a monthly status variable until 24 months after rehabilitation and as a rate of all persons who were employed at the 12 and 24 months follow up and in the 3 months before, respectively. To analyse the factors influencing stable work participation, multiple logistic regression models with stepwise inclusion were calculated separately for the rates after 12 and 24 months.

Results: A total of 42,230 data sets were included in the analysis (CD: n=18,368, 44%; MS: n=6,343, 15%). Patients with neurological diseases were 50 years old on average, 43% were female. We found that approximately15% of patients reported no absenteeism, whereas 17% stated an absence leave of six months or more in the year prior to rehabilitation. Mental and cardiovascular comorbidity was documented in 31 and 44% of the cases respectively. Nearly 48% of patients with CD returned to work two years after rehabilitation. For MS patients, the percentage was slightly higher at 54%. The amount of sick leave of the rehabilitated individual, their gross/net income prior to rehabilitation as well their work capacity prior to admission were the three strongest influencing factors on their return to the labour market.

Conclusion: About half of all persons with neurological diseases return to sustainable work after medical rehabilitation in Germany. The amount of sick leave and the income before rehabilitation are determining factors as to whether the person will return to work. The analysis provides representative data on occupational reintegration after medical rehabilitation due to a neurological disease for the first time.