Jason Hsu, Kirk Kee, Andrew Perkins, Alex Gorelik, Jeremy Goldin, Louisa Ng
{"title":"一种新的睡眠临床途径在住院患者肌肉骨骼康复队列中的有效性:一项随机对照试验。","authors":"Jason Hsu, Kirk Kee, Andrew Perkins, Alex Gorelik, Jeremy Goldin, Louisa Ng","doi":"10.2340/20030711-1000029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Sleep disturbance in hospital is common. This pilot randomized controlled trial assessed a sleep clinical pathway compared with standard care in improving sleep quality, engagement in therapy and length of stay in musculoskeletal inpatient rehabilitation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants (<i>n</i> = 51) were randomized to standard care (\"control\", <i>n</i> =29) or sleep clinical pathway (\"intervention\", <i>n</i> = 22). Outcome measures included: Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), Hopkins Rehabilitation Engagement Rating Scale (HRERS), Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS), Patient Satisfaction with Sleep Scale, and actigraphy. Assessment time-points were at admission and before discharge from rehabilitation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No significant differences were found between groups for any outcome measure. As a cohort (<i>n</i> = 51), there were significant improvements from admission to discharge in sleep quality (PSQI (-2.31; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) -3.33 to -1.30; <i>p</i> <0.001)], fatigue (FSS (-8.75; 95% CI -13.15 to -4.34; <i>p</i> <0.001)], engagement with therapy (HRERS-Physiotherapists (+1.37; 95% CI 0.51-3.17; <i>p</i> =0.037), HRERS-Occupational Therapists (+1.84; 95% CI 0.089-2.65; <i>p</i> = 0.008)), and satisfaction with sleep (+0.824; 95% CI 0.35-1.30; <i>p</i> = 0.001). Actigraphy findings were equivocal.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The sleep clinical pathway did not improve sleep quality compared with standard care. Larger studies and studies with alternate methodology such as \"cluster randomization\" are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":73929,"journal":{"name":"Journal of rehabilitation medicine. Clinical communications","volume":"3 ","pages":"1000029"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/a1/1d/JRMCC-3-1000029.PMC8008738.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effectiveness of a Novel Sleep Clinical Pathway in an Inpatient Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation Cohort: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Jason Hsu, Kirk Kee, Andrew Perkins, Alex Gorelik, Jeremy Goldin, Louisa Ng\",\"doi\":\"10.2340/20030711-1000029\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Sleep disturbance in hospital is common. This pilot randomized controlled trial assessed a sleep clinical pathway compared with standard care in improving sleep quality, engagement in therapy and length of stay in musculoskeletal inpatient rehabilitation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants (<i>n</i> = 51) were randomized to standard care (\\\"control\\\", <i>n</i> =29) or sleep clinical pathway (\\\"intervention\\\", <i>n</i> = 22). Outcome measures included: Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), Hopkins Rehabilitation Engagement Rating Scale (HRERS), Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS), Patient Satisfaction with Sleep Scale, and actigraphy. Assessment time-points were at admission and before discharge from rehabilitation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No significant differences were found between groups for any outcome measure. As a cohort (<i>n</i> = 51), there were significant improvements from admission to discharge in sleep quality (PSQI (-2.31; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) -3.33 to -1.30; <i>p</i> <0.001)], fatigue (FSS (-8.75; 95% CI -13.15 to -4.34; <i>p</i> <0.001)], engagement with therapy (HRERS-Physiotherapists (+1.37; 95% CI 0.51-3.17; <i>p</i> =0.037), HRERS-Occupational Therapists (+1.84; 95% CI 0.089-2.65; <i>p</i> = 0.008)), and satisfaction with sleep (+0.824; 95% CI 0.35-1.30; <i>p</i> = 0.001). Actigraphy findings were equivocal.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The sleep clinical pathway did not improve sleep quality compared with standard care. Larger studies and studies with alternate methodology such as \\\"cluster randomization\\\" are needed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73929,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of rehabilitation medicine. Clinical communications\",\"volume\":\"3 \",\"pages\":\"1000029\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-02-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/a1/1d/JRMCC-3-1000029.PMC8008738.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of rehabilitation medicine. Clinical communications\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2340/20030711-1000029\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2020/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of rehabilitation medicine. Clinical communications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2340/20030711-1000029","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:医院睡眠障碍较为常见。该试点随机对照试验评估了与标准护理相比,睡眠临床途径在改善睡眠质量、参与治疗和肌肉骨骼住院康复的住院时间方面的效果。方法:51名参与者随机分为标准治疗组(对照组,n =29)和睡眠临床途径组(干预组,n = 22)。结果测量包括:匹兹堡睡眠质量指数(PSQI)、霍普金斯康复参与评定量表(hrs)、疲劳严重程度量表(FSS)、患者睡眠满意度量表和活动记录仪。评估时间点为入院和康复出院前。结果:两组之间的任何结果测量均无显著差异。作为一个队列(n = 51),从入院到出院,睡眠质量有显著改善(PSQI (-2.31;95%置信区间(95% CI) -3.33 ~ -1.30;p p =0.037), hrs -职业治疗师(+1.84;95% ci 0.089-2.65;P = 0.008))、睡眠满意度(+0.824;95% ci 0.35-1.30;P = 0.001)。活动描记结果不明确。结论:与标准护理相比,睡眠临床路径没有改善睡眠质量。需要更大规模的研究和采用“聚类随机化”等替代方法的研究。
Effectiveness of a Novel Sleep Clinical Pathway in an Inpatient Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation Cohort: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.
Objective: Sleep disturbance in hospital is common. This pilot randomized controlled trial assessed a sleep clinical pathway compared with standard care in improving sleep quality, engagement in therapy and length of stay in musculoskeletal inpatient rehabilitation.
Methods: Participants (n = 51) were randomized to standard care ("control", n =29) or sleep clinical pathway ("intervention", n = 22). Outcome measures included: Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), Hopkins Rehabilitation Engagement Rating Scale (HRERS), Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS), Patient Satisfaction with Sleep Scale, and actigraphy. Assessment time-points were at admission and before discharge from rehabilitation.
Results: No significant differences were found between groups for any outcome measure. As a cohort (n = 51), there were significant improvements from admission to discharge in sleep quality (PSQI (-2.31; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) -3.33 to -1.30; p <0.001)], fatigue (FSS (-8.75; 95% CI -13.15 to -4.34; p <0.001)], engagement with therapy (HRERS-Physiotherapists (+1.37; 95% CI 0.51-3.17; p =0.037), HRERS-Occupational Therapists (+1.84; 95% CI 0.089-2.65; p = 0.008)), and satisfaction with sleep (+0.824; 95% CI 0.35-1.30; p = 0.001). Actigraphy findings were equivocal.
Conclusion: The sleep clinical pathway did not improve sleep quality compared with standard care. Larger studies and studies with alternate methodology such as "cluster randomization" are needed.