Search

Abstract Background Optimizing return to work (RTW) after knee arthroplasty (KA) is becoming increasingly important due to a growing incidence of KA and poor RTW outcomes after KA. We developed the Back At work After Surgery (BAAS) clinical pathway for optimized RTW after KA. Since the effectiveness and cost analysis of the BAAS clinical pathway are still unknown, analysis on effectiveness and costs of BAAS is imperative. Method This protocol paper has been written in line with the standards of Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trails. To assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness for RTW, we will perform a multicenter prospective cohort study with patients who decided to receive a total KA (TKA) or an unicompartmental KA (UKA). To evaluate the effectiveness of BAAS regarding RTW, a comparison to usual care will be made using individual patient data on RTW from prospectively performed cohort studies in the Netherlands. Discussion One of the strengths of this study is that the feasibility for the BAAS clinical pathway was tested at first hand. Also, we will use validated questionnaires and functional tests to assess the patient’s recovery using robust outcomes. Moreover, the intervention was performed in two hospitals serving the targeted patient group and to reduce selection bias and improve generalizability. The limitations of this study protocol are that the lead author has an active role as a medical case manager (MCM) in one of the hospitals. Additionally, we will use the data from other prospective Dutch cohort studies to compare our findings regarding RTW to usual care. Since we will not perform an RCT, we will use propensity analysis to reduce the bias due to possible differences between these cohorts. Trail Registration This study was retrospectively registered at clinicaltrails.gov ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05690347 , date of first registration: 19–01-2023).

Objective: Self-regulation, participation and health-related quality of life are important rehabilitation outcomes. The aim of this study was to explore associations between these outcomes in a multi-diagnostic and heterogenic group of former rehabilitation patients. Methods: This cross-sectional survey used the Self-Regulation Assessment (SeRA), Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation-participation (USERParticipation) and the Patient-Reported-Outcome-Measurement-System (PROMIS) ability and PROMIS satisfaction with participation in social roles, and the EuroQol-5L-5D and PROMIS-10 Global Health. Regression analyses, controlling for demographic and condition-related factors, were performed. Results: Respondents (n = 563) had a mean age of 56.5 (standard deviation (SD) 12.7) years. The largest diagnostic groups were chronic pain disorder and brain injury. In addition to demographic and condition-related factors, self-regulation subscales explained 0–15% of the variance in participation outcome scores, and 0–22% of the variance in HRQoL outcome scores. Self-regulation subscales explained up to 22% of the variance in satisfaction subscales of participation (USER-Participation and PROMIS) and the mental health subscale of the PROMIS-10. Self-regulation subscales explained up to 11% of the restriction and frequency subscales of participation (USER-Participation) and the physical health subscale of the PROMIS-10. Conclusion: Self-regulation is more strongly associated with outcomes such as satisfaction with participation and mental health compared with outcomes such as restrictions in participation and physical health. LAY ABSTRACT This article provide insights into the assocations between self-regulation, participation and health-related quality of life. This was studied in a rehabilitation population. Diagnostic groups included were: brain injury, chronic pain disorder, spinal cord injury, neurological and neuromuscular disorder, musculoskeletal disorder and oncology. We found that persons with higher levels of self-regulation, experience more satisfaction with their functioning in the community and experience less mental health problems. Also, when persons have trust in themselves, they tend to have less mental health problems and are more satisfied in their daily life.

Abstract Background Musculoskeletal complaints of arm, neck, and shoulder (CANS) can lead to loss of work productivity. To assess the functional consequences of impairments in work, patient-reported outcomes can be important. The Hand Function Sort (HFS) is a 62-item pictorial questionnaire that focuses on work task performance. The aims of this study were the cross-cultural adaptation of HFS into HFS-Dutch Language Version (HFS-DLV) (Part I) and determining construct validity, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, responsiveness and floor/ceiling effects of HFS-DLV (Part II). Methods I: Translation into Dutch using international guidelines. II: Construct validity was assessed with Spearman’s correlation coefficients between the HFS-DLV and the Dutch version of the QuickDASH, PRWHE, PDI, RAND-36, NRS-pain, and work ability score. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach’s α and reliability by a test-retest procedure. A global rating scale of change was used after 4–8 weeks of hand therapy to determine responsiveness. Results I: Forty patients were included, and no items were changed. II: 126 patients with hand, wrist, and/or forearm disorders classified as specific or nonspecific CANS. Six predefined hypotheses (50%) were confirmed. Cronbach’s α: 0.98. Test-retest reliability: ICC of 0.922. AUC of 0.752. There were no floor/ceiling effects. Conclusions I: Translation process into the HFS-DLV went according to plan. II: For construct validity, the presumed direction of correlations was correct, but less than 75% of hypotheses were confirmed. Internal consistency was high, suggesting redundancy. Reliability and responsiveness of the HFS-DLV were good. HFS-DLV can be used in research or clinical practice for Dutch patients with CANS, to evaluate self-reported functional work ability.

Objectives: Several surgical techniques are available for the treatment of cervical degenerative disease. For resolving cervical nerve root compression, anterior cervical discectomy with fusion (ACDF) or posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF) can be applied. Amongst neurosurgeons, there seems to be a tendency to prefer ACDF, even though there are some advantages in favor of PCF. The objective of present study is to evaluate which factors determine the choice for an anterior or posterior surgical approach in patients with cervical radiculopathy based on foraminal pathology. Methods: A web-based survey was sent to all 133 neurosurgeons in the Netherlands. The study followed a mixed methods cross-sectional design. The first part of the survey focused on general perceived (dis)advantages of ACDF and PCF. The second part concerned questions about the choice between the two procedures. Furthermore, it was analyzed if exposure during training, amount of performed surgeries, assumed reoperation and complication rates influenced the choice of procedure by conducting Chi-square tests with post-hoc analysis. Results: A total of 56 neurosurgeons responded (42%). An overall preference for ACDF was observed, even when differentiating for a pure disc prolapse, a spondylotic or a combined stenosis of the neuroforamen. The most relative important factors for motivating the preference for either ACDF or PCF were: the assumed best decompression of the nerve root (18%), congruence with current literature (16%), exposure during residency (12%), personal comfort (11%) and experience (11%) with the technique. Conclusion: In this survey, there was an overall preference for ACDF above PCF for the surgical treatment of a foraminal cervical radiculopathy. In addition to subjective factors as “experience” and “comfort”, the respondents often motivated their choice as “the best one according to literature”. As there is currently no evidence about the superiority of any of the procedures in literature, this assumption is remarkable.

Abstract Background There is a large and unexplained practice variation in prescribed dosages of pain rehabilitation programs (PRP), and evidence regarding the optimum dosage is unknown. Methods To explore perspectives of patients and rehabilitation professionals regarding dosages of PRP an explorative qualitative research design was performed with thematic analysis. Patients and rehabilitation professionals were recruited from three rehabilitaton centers in the Netherlands. A purposive sample of patients who completed a PRP, with a range of personal and clinical characteristics was included. Rehabilitation professionals from all different disciplines, working within multidisciplinary PRP for a minimum of two years, for at least 0.5 fte were included. Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 patients undergoing PRP, and three focus groups were formed with a total of 17 rehabilitation professionals involved in PRP. Results All patients were satisfied with received dosage. Factors important in relation to dosage of PRP were categorized into patient related characteristics (case complexity from a biopsychosocial perspective) to treatment related characteristics (logistics and format of the program, interaction between patients and professionals), and external factors (support from others, costs, traveling distance and injury compensation). Professionals concluded that dosage was currently based on historical grounds and clinical expertise. Conclusion Patients and professionals from different centers considered the same factors related to dosage of PRP, but these considerations (from patients and professionals) led to different dose choices between centers. PRP dosage appeared to be mainly based on historical grounds and clinical expertise. The insights of this study could assist in future research regarding optimum dosage of PRP and rehabilitation programs in general.

BackgroundDecision support systems (DSSs) for suggesting optimal treatments for individual patients with low back pain (LBP) are currently insufficiently accurate for clinical application. Most of the input provided to train these systems is based on patient-reported outcome measures. However, with the appearance of electronic health records (EHRs), additional qualitative data on reasons for referrals and patients’ goals become available for DSSs. Currently, no decision support tools cover a wide range of biopsychosocial factors, including referral letter information to help clinicians triage patients to the optimal LBP treatment. ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to investigate the added value of including qualitative data from EHRs and referral letters to the accuracy of a quantitative DSS for patients with LBP. MethodsA retrospective study was conducted in a clinical cohort of Dutch patients with LBP. Patients filled out a baseline questionnaire about demographics, pain, disability, work status, quality of life, medication, psychosocial functioning, comorbidity, history, and duration of pain. Referral reasons and patient requests for help (patient goals) were extracted via natural language processing (NLP) and enriched in the data set. For decision support, these data were considered independent factors for triage to neurosurgery, anesthesiology, rehabilitation, or minimal intervention. Support vector machine, k-nearest neighbor, and multilayer perceptron models were trained for 2 conditions: with and without consideration of the referral letter content. The models’ accuracies were evaluated via F1-scores, and confusion matrices were used to predict the treatment path (out of 4 paths) with and without additional referral parameters. ResultsData from 1608 patients were evaluated. The evaluation indicated that 2 referral reasons from the referral letters (for anesthesiology and rehabilitation intervention) increased the F1-score accuracy by up to 19.5% for triaging. The confusion matrices confirmed the results. ConclusionsThis study indicates that data enriching by adding NLP-based extraction of the content of referral letters increases the model accuracy of DSSs in suggesting optimal treatments for individual patients with LBP. Overall model accuracies were considered low and insufficient for clinical application.

STUDY DESIGN.: Video observation study. OBJECTIVES.: To establish the validity of determining effort level by visual observation of a lifting test. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA.: Determining effort level during a lifting test is critical for interpretation of test performance, yet the validity of these determinations has not been established in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain. METHODS.: Fifteen healthy subjects and 16 patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain performed a standardized lifting test as outlined in the Isernhagen Work System Functional Capacity Evaluation. The lifts were videotaped and independently observed by 9 trained observers, who rated effort levels using an Isernhagen Work System categorical scale () and a Borg Category Ratio scale (). External effort indexes were established to control for effort at group level. Validity of the observer ratings was analyzed by means of a sensitivity and specificity analysis and correlations between performances and observer ratings. Interrater reliability was analyzed by means of intraclass correlation coefficients and Cohen kappa. RESULTS.: External indexes differ significantly between patients with chronic low back pain and healthy subjects, indicating that at group level, patients did not perform maximally. Submaximal performances were correctly rated in 85% to 90% (healthy subjects) and in 100% (patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain) of the cases. Maximal performances were correctly rated in 46% to 53% (healthy subjects) and in 5% to 7% (patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain) of the cases. Correlations between performances and observer ratings were r = 0.90 to r = 0.92 (healthy subjects) and r = 0.82 (patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain). Reliability: intraclass correlation coefficient, r = 0.76 (patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain) to r = 0.87 (healthy), Kappa K = 0.50 (patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain) to r = 0.58 (healthy subjects). CONCLUSIONS.: Effort level can be determined validly by means of visual observation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective This study aimed to explore the influence of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) on both postoperative cognitive dysfunction and quality of life (QoL) and the association between the two patient-related outcomes.Methods In a prospective, observational cohort study, patients with elective, isolated CABG were included. Cognitive function was assessed using the Cogstate computerised cognitive test battery preoperatively, 3 days and 6 months after surgery. QoL was measured preoperatively and at 6 months using the RAND-36 questionnaire including the Physical Component Score (PCS) and the Mental Component Score (MCS). Regression analysis, with adjustment for confounders, was used to evaluate the association between postoperative cognitive dysfunction and QoL.Results A total of 142 patients were included in the study. Evidence of persistent cognitive dysfunction was observed in 33% of patients after 6 months. At 6 months, the PCS had improved in 59% and decreased in 21% of patients, and the MCS increased in 49% and decreased in 29%. Postoperative cognitive changes were not associated with QoL scores.Conclusions Postoperative cognitive dysfunction and decreased QoL are common 6 months after surgery, although cognitive function and QoL were found to have improved in many patients at 6 months of follow-up. Impaired cognitive function is not associated with impaired QoL at 6 months.Trial registration number NCT03774342.

IntroductionA relevant subsample of patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) have manifested augmented central pain processing, central sensitisation (CS). Patients with CLBP have limited functioning and participation. Theoretically, physical functioning in patients with CLBP can plausibly be linked to CS; however, evidence to explain such association is scarce. Moreover, there is no gold standard for CS diagnosis. The objectives of the study are: (1) to analyse the association between instruments assessing reference symptoms and signs attributed to CS; (2) to analyse whether reference symptoms and signs attributed to CS are associated with functioning measurement outcomes; and (3) to analyse whether changes (between baseline and discharge) in reference symptoms and signs attributed to CS are related to changes in each of the functioning measurement outcomes.Methods and analysisA cross-sectional and longitudinal observational study is performed with measurements taken at baseline and discharge of an interdisciplinary rehabilitation programme. A sample size of 110 adult patients with CLBP has been calculated for the study. CS measurements are: Central Sensitisation Inventory, quantitative sensory testing and heart rate variability. Functioning measurements are: lifting capacity, maximal aerobic capacity, accelerometry and reported functioning. Statistical analyses to be performed are: (1) correlation between CS measurements, (2) multiple regression between functioning (dependent variable) and CS measurements (independent variable), and (3) multiple regression between changes in scores of functioning (dependent variable) and CS measurements (independent variable), and corrected for sex and age.Ethics and disseminationThe study obtained the clearance to its implementation from the Medical Research Ethics Committee of the University Medical Center Groningen in July 2017. The results will be disseminated through scientific publications in peer-reviewed journals, presentations at relevant conferences, and reports to stakeholders.Trial registration numberNTR7167/NL6980.

OBJECTIVES: The Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT) is used in vocational rehabilitation to guide decisions about the ability of a person with activity limitations to perform activities at work. The DOT has categorized physical work demands in five categories. The validity of this categorization is unknown. Aim of this study was to investigate whether the DOT could be used validly to guide decisions for patients with injuries to the upper extremities. Four hypotheses were tested. METHODS: A database including 701 healthy workers was used. All subjects filled out the Dutch Musculoskeletal Questionnaire, from which an Upper Extremity Work Demands score (UEWD) was derived. First, relation between the DOT-categories and UEWD-score was analysed using Spearman correlations. Second, variance of the UEWD-score in occupational groups was tested by visually inspecting boxplots and assessing kurtosis of the distribution. Third, it was investigated whether occupations classified in one DOT-category, could significantly differ on UEWD-scores. Fourth, it was investigated whether occupations in different DOT-categories could have similar UEWD-scores using Mann Whitney U-tests (MWU). RESULTS: Relation between the DOT-categories and the UEWD-score was weak (r(sp) = 0.40; p