Search

Background: The number of people with common mental disorders (CMDs), especially stress-related disorders, has increased in several countries, including Sweden, during the past decade. Patients seeking care for long-term stress report severe symptoms. Although person-centred care (PCC) has shown several benefits, studies evaluating the effects of a PCC eHealth intervention on patients with CMDs are scarce. Objective: The aim of this study was to compare levels of self-reported symptoms of burnout between a control group receiving treatment as usual (TAU) and an intervention group receiving TAU with the addition of a person-centred eHealth intervention, in patients on sick leave for CMDs. Methods: This study reports analysis of a secondary outcome measure from a randomized controlled trial. Patients (n = 209) on sick leave for CMDs were recruited from nine primary health care centres and allocated to either a control group (n = 107) or an intervention group (n = 102). The intervention consisted of phone support and an interactive digital platform built on PCC principles. Self-reported symptoms of burnout were assessed using the Shirom-Melamed Burnout Questionnaire (SMBQ) at baseline and at 3 and 6 months. Results: Our findings showed changes in SMBQ scores over time in both the control and the intervention group. There was no significant difference in SMBQ scores between the groups; however, a difference in change over time between the groups was observed. The SMBQ scores decreased significantly more in the intervention group than in the controls between 0 and 3 months and between 0 and 6 months. No differences in change between the two groups were seen between the 3- and 6-month follow-ups. Conclusion: This person-centred eHealth intervention for patients on sick leave for CMDs showed a slight initial effect in reducing symptoms of burnout. Taking into account that both groups reported comparable SMBQ scores throughout the study period, the overall effect may be considered limited. Trial registration: : The trial was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier NCT03404583). Date of registration: 19/01/2018. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03404583. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This pre-planned secondary analysis of geriatric interdisciplinary home rehabilitation, which was initially found to shorten the postoperative length of stay in hospital for older individuals following hip fracture, investigated whether such rehabilitation reduced the numbers of complications, readmissions, and total days spent in hospital after discharge during a 12-month follow-up period compared with conventional geriatric care and rehabilitation. Design: Randomized controlled trial. Setting: Geriatric department, participants' residential care facilities, and ordinary housing. Subjects: Individuals aged ⩾70 years with acute hip fracture (n = 205) were included. Intervention: Geriatric interdisciplinary home rehabilitation was individually designed and aimed at early discharge with the intention to prevent, detect, and treat complications after discharge. Main measures: Complications, readmissions, and days spent in hospital were registered from patients' digital records and interviews conducted during hospitalization and at 3- and 12-month follow-up visits. Results: No significant difference in outcomes was observed. Between discharge and the 12-month follow-up, among participants in the geriatric interdisciplinary home rehabilitation group (n = 106) and control group (n = 93), 57 (53.8%) and 44 (47.3%) had complications (P = 0.443), 46 (43.4%) and 38 (40.9%) fell (P = 0.828), and 38 (35.8%) and 27 (29.0%) were readmitted to hospital (P = 0.383); the median total days spent in hospital were 11.5 and 11.0 (P = 0.353), respectively. Conclusion: Geriatric interdisciplinary home rehabilitation for older individuals following hip fracture resulted in similar proportions of complications, readmissions, and total days spent in hospital after discharge compared with conventional geriatric care and rehabilitation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim To compare and evaluate the treatment outcomes of a nurse-led rheumatology clinic and a rheumatologist-led clinic in patients with low disease activity or in remission who are undergoing biological therapy. Background Patients with chronic inflammatory arthritis treated with biological therapy are usually monitored by rheumatologists. Nurse-led rheumatology clinics have been proposed in patients with low disease activity or in remission. Design Randomized controlled trial. Methods A 12-month follow-up trial was conducted between October 2009 and August 2011, where 107 patients were randomized into two groups with a 6-month follow-up to a nurse-led rheumatology clinic based on person-centred care (intervention group; n = 53) or to a rheumatologist-led clinic (control group; n = 54). The hypothesis was that the nurse-led clinic outcomes would not be inferior to those obtained from a rheumatologist-led clinic at the 12-month follow-up. The primary outcome was disease activity measured by Disease Activity Score 28. Results A total of 47 patients in the intervention group and 50 in the control group completed the 12-month trial. The trial revealed no statistically significant differences between groups in mean change of Disease Activity Score 28, Visual Analogue Scales for pain, the Health Assessment Questionnaire, satisfaction with or confidence in obtaining rheumatology care. Conclusion Patients with stable chronic inflammatory arthritis undergoing biological therapy could be monitored by a nurse-led rheumatology clinic without difference in outcome as measured by the Disease Activity Score 28. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]