Dataset Information

Protocol of a randomized controlled trial of the effectiveness of physician education and activation versus two rehabilitation programs for the treatment of Whiplash-associated Disorders: The University Health Network Whiplash Intervention Trial.

ABSTRACT: Whiplash injuries are an important public health problem that is associated with significant disability and high health care utilization. Recent cohort studies suggest that physician care may be the most effective treatment for patients with whiplash-associated disorders. However, these findings have not been tested in a randomized controlled trial. The purpose of this study is to determine which of physician care or two rehabilitation programs of care is most effective in improving recovery of patients with recent whiplash associated disorders.We designed a pragmatic randomized clinical trial. A total of 444 participants (148 in each of three arms) who reside in Southern Ontario, Canada will be recruited from a large insurer. We will include individuals who are 18 years of age or older and who are diagnosed with Grade I or II Whiplash-associated Disorders. Participants will be randomized to physician-based education and activation or one of two rehabilitation programs of care currently in use in Ontario. Our primary outcome, self-rated global recovery and all secondary outcomes (neck pain intensity, whiplash disability, health-related quality of life, depressive symptomatology and satisfaction with care) will be measured at baseline by a trial coordinator and at 6 weeks, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months follow-up by an interviewer who is blind to the participants' baseline characteristics and treatment allocation. We will also collect information on general health status, other injuries, comorbidities, expectation of recovery, work status, pain coping, legal representation, and co-interventions. The primary intention-to-treat analysis will compare time to recovery between the three interventions. This trial will have 90% power at an alpha of 0.05 to detect a 20% difference in the rate of perceived recovery at one year. Secondary analyses will compare the health outcomes, rate of recurrence and the rate of adverse events between intervention groups.The results of this study will provide the public, clinicians and policy makers much needed evidence on the effectiveness of common approaches used to manage whiplash-associated disorders.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00546806.

SUBMITTER: Cote P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2642757 | biostudies-literature | 2008 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Protocol of a randomized controlled trial of the effectiveness of physician education and activation versus two rehabilitation programs for the treatment of Whiplash-associated Disorders: The University Health Network Whiplash Intervention Trial.

Côté Pierre P Cassidy J David JD Carette Simon S Boyle Eleanor E Shearer Heather M HM Stupar Maja M Ammendolia Carlo C van der Velde Gabrielle G Hayden Jill A JA Yang Xiaoqing X van Tulder Maurits M Frank John W JW

Trials 20081224

<h4>Background</h4>Whiplash injuries are an important public health problem that is associated with significant disability and high health care utilization. Recent cohort studies suggest that physician care may be the most effective treatment for patients with whiplash-associated disorders. However, these findings have not been tested in a randomized controlled trial. The purpose of this study is to determine which of physician care or two rehabilitation programs of care is most effective in imp ...[more]

PMID: 19108741

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the effectiveness of a government-regulated rehabilitation guideline compared with education and activation by general practitioners, and to a preferred-provider insurance-based rehabilitation programme on self-reported global recovery from acute whiplash-associated disorders (WAD) grade I-II. DESIGN:Pragmatic randomised clinical trial with blinded outcome assessment. SETTING:Multidisciplinary rehabilitation clinics and general practitioners in Ontario, Canada. PARTICIPANTS:340 participants with acute WAD grade I and II. Potential participants were sampled from a large automobile insurer when reporting a traffic injury. INTERVENTIONS:Participants were randomised to receive one of three protocols: government-regulated rehabilitation guideline, education and activation by general practitioners or a preferred-provider insurance-based rehabilitation. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES:Our primary outcome was time to self-reported global recovery. Secondary outcomes included time on insurance benefits, neck pain intensity, whiplash-related disability, health-related quality of life and depressive symptomatology at 6 weeks and 3, 6, 9 and 12 months postinjury. RESULTS:The median time to self-reported global recovery was 59 days (95% CI 55 to 68) for the government-regulated guideline group, 105 days (95% CI 61 to 126) for the preferred-provider group and 108 days (95% CI 93 to 206) for the general practitioner group; the difference was not statistically significant (Χ2=3.96; 2 df: p=0.138). We found no clinically important differences between groups in secondary outcomes. Post hoc analysis suggests that the general practitioner (hazard rate ratio (HRR)=0.51, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.77) and preferred-provider groups (HRR=0.67, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.96) had slower recovery than the government-regulated guideline group during the first 80 days postinjury. No major adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS:Time-to-recovery did not significantly differ across intervention groups. We found no differences between groups with regard to neck-specific outcomes, depression and health-related quality of life. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT00546806.

Project description:In 2011, more than half of the patients with stroke in Australian hospitals were not assessed for the need for rehabilitation. Further, there were no recommended criteria to guide rehabilitation assessment decisions. Subsequently, a decision-making tool called the Assessment for Rehabilitation Tool (ART) was developed. The ART was designed to assist Australian hospital clinicians to identify the rehabilitation needs of patients with stroke using evidence-based criteria. The ART was released and made freely available for use in 2012. This study evaluated the effectiveness of an education-only intervention (1 onsite education session and distribution of the ART) and a multifaceted intervention (2 or more onsite education sessions, distribution of the ART, audit and feedback, barrier identification, site-specific strategy development, promotion of interdisciplinary teamwork, opinion leaders and reminders) for improving assessments of rehabilitation needs after stroke.Ten hospitals in 2 states of Australia were randomly assigned to an education-only or a multifaceted intervention. Medical records were audited by assessors blinded to group allocation before and after the implementation period. Difference in the proportion of patients assessed for rehabilitation before and after the intervention was analysed using mixed-effects logistic regression analysis, with time period as the dependent variable, an interaction between intervention type and time included to test for differences between the interventions, and hospital included as the random effect to account for patient clustering.Data from 586 patients (284 pre-intervention; 302 post-intervention; age 76 years, 59 % male) showed that the multifaceted intervention was not more effective than education-only in improving the proportion of patients whose rehabilitation needs were assessed (reference category education-only; odds ratio 1.29, 95 % confidence interval 0.63-2.67, p = 0.483). Post-intervention, the odds of a patient's rehabilitation needs being assessed was 3.69 times greater than pre-intervention (95 % confidence interval 2.57-5.30, p < 0.001). Evidence-based criteria were not consistently used when patients were deemed to have no rehabilitation needs.A multifaceted intervention was not more effective than education-only in improving the assessment of rehabilitation needs of patients with stroke. Further interventions are required to ensure that all patients are assessed for the need for rehabilitation using evidence-based criteria.ANZCTR (Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry), ACTRN12616000340437.

Project description:Long-term sick leave has considerably negative impact on the individual and society. Hence, the need to identify effective occupational rehabilitation programs is pressing. In Norway, group based occupational rehabilitation programs merging patients with different diagnoses have existed for many years, but no rigorous evaluation has been performed. The described randomized controlled trial aims primarily to compare two structured multicomponent inpatient rehabilitation programs, differing in length and content, with a comparative cognitive intervention. Secondarily the two inpatient programs will be compared with each other, and with a usual care reference group.The study is designed as a randomized controlled trial with parallel groups. The Social Security Office performs monthly extractions of sick listed individuals aged 18-60 years, on sick leave 2-12 months, with sick leave status 50% - 100% due to musculoskeletal, mental or unspecific disorders. Sick-listed persons are randomized twice: 1) to receive one of two invitations to participate in the study or not receive an invitation, where the latter "untouched" control group will be monitored for future sick leave in the National Social Security Register, and 2) after inclusion, to a Long or Short inpatient multicomponent rehabilitation program (depending on which invitation was sent) or an outpatient cognitive behavioral therapy group comparative program. The Long program consists of 3 ½?weeks with full rehabilitation days. The Short program consists of 4?+?4 full days, separated by two weeks, in which a workplace visit will be performed if desirable. Three areas of rehabilitation are targeted: mental training, physical training and work-related problem solving. The primary outcome is number of sick leave days. Secondary outcomes include time until full sustainable return to work, health related quality of life, health related behavior, functional status, somatic and mental health, and perceptions of work. In addition, health economic evaluation will be performed, and the implementation of the interventions, expectations and experiences of users and service providers will be investigated with different qualitative methods.ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01926574.

Project description:Excessive drinking among university students is a global challenge, leading to significant health risks. However, heavy drinking among students is widely accepted and socially normalized. Mobile phone interventions have attempted to reach students who engage in excessive drinking. A growing number of studies suggest that text message-based interventions could potentially reach many students and, if effective, such an intervention might help reduce heavy drinking in the student community.The objective of this study was to test the effectiveness of a behavior change theory-based 6-week text message intervention among university students.This study was a two-arm, randomized controlled trial with an intervention group receiving a 6-week text message intervention and a control group that was referred to treatment as usual at the local student health care center. Outcome measures were collected at baseline and at 3 months after the initial invitation to participate in the intervention. The primary outcome was total weekly alcohol consumption. Secondary outcomes were frequency of heavy episodic drinking, highest estimated blood alcohol concentration, and number of negative consequences attributable to excessive drinking.A total of 896 students were randomized to either the intervention or control group. The primary outcome analysis included 92.0% of the participants in the intervention group and 90.1% of the control group. At follow-up, total weekly alcohol consumption decreased in both groups, but no significant between-group difference was seen. Data on the secondary outcomes included 49.1% of the participants in the intervention group and 41.3% of the control group. No significant between-group difference was seen for any of the secondary outcomes.The present study was under-powered, which could partly explain the lack of significance. However, the intervention, although theory-based, needs to be re-assessed and refined to better support the target group. Apart from establishing which content forms an effective intervention, the optimal length of an alcohol intervention targeting students also needs to be addressed in future studies.International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number ISRCTN95054707; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN95054707 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/70Ax4vXhd).

Project description:IntroductionThe relevance of rehabilitation in progressive neurological disorders, such as Friedreich's Ataxia (FRDA), has yet to be convincingly proven. FRDA is characterized by ataxia, loss of gait, scoliosis, cardiomyopathy, dysarthria and dysphagia, with reduced life expectancy. The disease onset is usually in adolescence, leading to progressive disability. Omaveloxolone has been recently approved as the first pharmacological treatment for FRDA in adults and adolescents aged 16 years and older. Regarding non-pharmacological therapies, neurorehabilitation is a valuable aid in addressing the symptoms and in maintaining the residual functioning. We performed a prospective observational cohort study to evaluate the efficacy of inpatient rehabilitation (IR) for people with FRDA.MethodsA total of 42 individuals (29 adults and 13 children) with FRDA were recruited. There were 27 ambulant and 15 non-ambulant participants. The patients underwent IR of 3 and 4 weeks in children and adults, respectively. The IR treatment was designed to be applied within a multidisciplinary setting, so FRDA patients underwent, in addition to physiotherapy, also occupational therapy, practical manual activities and psychological support aiming to enhance transferable skills useful in the activities of daily living. The primary outcome was the Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA). Other measures were: Friedreich Ataxia Rating Scale (FARS) and Nine Hole Peg Test (NHPT). Furthermore, we used the 6 Minute Walk Test (6MWT), the Timed Up and Go (TUG) and the Berg Balance Scale (BBS) only on ambulant subjects. Outcomes were evaluated at baseline and at the end of the treatment.ResultsWe report that the IR significantly improves motor performance and ataxia symptoms in patients with FRDA. Our study shows significant functional improvement in all the outcome measures used, except for NHPT bilaterally. FARS and SARA scores post-IR are significatively reduced when compared (p < 0.001).DiscussionWe demonstrate that IR programs in FRDA can provide a meaningful clinical improvement in terms of outcome measures. These findings could be useful when approaching progressive neurological disorders.

Dataset Information

Protocol of a randomized controlled trial of the effectiveness of physician education and activation versus two rehabilitation programs for the treatment of Whiplash-associated Disorders: The University Health Network Whiplash Intervention Trial.

Publications

Protocol of a randomized controlled trial of the effectiveness of physician education and activation versus two rehabilitation programs for the treatment of Whiplash-associated Disorders: The University Health Network Whiplash Intervention Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets