Telephone follow-up by nurse following total knee arthroplasty – protocol for a randomized clinical trial (NCT 01771315)

BMC Nursing

Birte Østergaard²  Søren Solgaard¹  Hanne Konradsen³  Kirsten Szöts⁴ 

[1] Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Gentofte University Hospital, Niels Andersens Vej 65, 2900 Hellerup, Denmark;Research Unit of Nursing, Institute of Clinical Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Campusvej 55, 5230 Odense M, Denmark;Research Unit, Gentofte University Hospital, Niels Andersens Vej 65, 2900 Hellerup, Denmark;Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University Hospital, Niels Andersens Vej 65, 2900 Hellerup, Denmark

关键词: Self-efficacy;    Health status;    Telephone follow-up;    Total knee arthroplasty;   

Others  :  1091206
DOI  :  10.1186/1472-6955-13-14

 received in 2013-07-08, accepted in 2014-05-02,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Due to shorter hospitalization, patients have to take responsibility for their rehabilitation period at a very early stage. The objective of this trial is to study the effects of two treatment schemes following total knee arthroplasty: conventional treatment following discharge from hospital and early follow-up by telephone consultations in addition to conventional treatment following discharge from hospital. The ultimate aim is to increase the effectiveness of the treatment by improving patients' health status, promote self-efficacy, and reduce the number of acute visits to the orthopaedic outpatient clinic during the rehabilitation period.

Method/design

The design is a randomized un-blinded parallel group clinical trial conducted at the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Gentofte Hospital, the Capital Region of Denmark. In total, 116 patients will be allocated by an external randomization program to 2 groups: an intervention group following usual treatment after discharge supplemented by a nurse managed structured follow-up consultation conducted by telephone 4 and 14 days after discharge from hospital and a control group following treatment as usual. The consultations are structured by key subjects relevant to assess the health status according to the VIPS-model (the Swedish acronym for the concepts Well-being, Integrity, Prevention and Safety). The content of the consultations can vary according to the patients´ individual situations and needs. All consultations are conducted by the researcher responsible for the trial.

The effect is measured 1, 3, 6 and 12 months post-surgery. The primary outcome is self-reported physical function measured by The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index. Secondary outcomes are self-reported health-related quality of life, general self-efficacy and the number of acute visits to the orthopaedic outpatient clinic.

Discussion

The result of this trial is expected to provide new knowledge to support the development of targeted and effective follow-up after total knee arthroplasty in order to improve the patients´ health-related knowledge and skills of being able to take actively part in their illness and improve their health status.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01771315

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Szöts et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Sorci R: Increasing Incidence of Joint Replacements Burdens Healthcare Systems. 2013. [http://www.nerac.com/nerac_insights.php?category=articles&id=150 webcite]. Accessed 8 July 2013
• [2]Dansk knæalloplastikregister - Årsrapport 2012. [http://www.knee.dk/groups/dkr/pdf/DKRrapport2012.pdf webcite]. Accessed 8 July 2013
• [3]Carr AJ, Robertsson O, Graves S, Price AJ, Arden NK, Judge A, Beard DJ: Knee replacement. Lancet 2012, 379(9823):1331-1340.
• [4]Ethgen O, Bruyere O, Richy F, Dardennes C, Reginster JY: Health-related quality of life in total hip and total knee arthroplasty. A qualitative and systematic review of the literature. J Bone Joint Surgery Am Volume 2004, 86-A(5):963-974.
• [5]Salmon P, Hall GM, Peerbhoy D, Shenkin A, Parker C: Recovery from hip and knee arthroplasty: Patients' perspective on pain, function, quality of life, and well-being up to 6 months postoperatively. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2001, 82(3):360-366.
• [6]Kehlet H, Soballe K: Fast-track hip and knee replacement–what are the issues? Acta Orthop 2010, 81(3):271-272.
• [7]Rastogi R, Chesworth BM, Davis AM: Change in patient concerns following total knee arthroplasty described with the International Classification of Functioning. Disability and Health: a repeated measures design. Health Q life Outcomes 2008, 6:112. BioMed Central Full Text
• [8]Showalter A, Burger S, Salyer J: Patients' and their spouses' needs after total joint arthroplasty: a pilot study. Orthop Nurs 2000, 19(1):49-57. 62
• [9]Su HH, Tsai YF, Chen WJ, Chen MC: Health care needs of patients during early recovery after total knee-replacement surgery. J Clin Nurs 2010, 19(5–6):673-681.
• [10]Barksdale P, Backer J: Health-related stressors experienced by patients who underwent total knee replacement seven days after being discharged home. Orthop Nurs 2005, 24(5):336-342.
• [11]Westby MD, Backman CL: Patient and health professional views on rehabilitation practices and outcomes following total hip and knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis:a focus group study. BMC Health Serv Res 2010, 10:119. BioMed Central Full Text
• [12]Perruccio AV, Davis AM, Hogg-Johnson S, Badley EM: Importance of self-rated health and mental well-being in predicting health outcomes following total joint replacement surgery for osteoarthritis. Arthritis Care Res 2011, 63(7):973-981.
• [13]Bandura A: Self-efficacy. In Encyclopedia of human behaviour. Volume 4. Edited by Ramachaudran VS. New York: Academic Press; 1994::71-81.
• [14]Barlow J: Self-efficacy in the context of rehabilitation. In International Encyclopedia of Rehabilitaition. Edited by Stone J, Blouin M. Buffalo: Center for International Rehabilitation Research Information and Exchange (CIRRIE); 2013.
• [15]Moon LB, Backer J: Relationships among self-efficacy, outcome expectancy, and postoperative behaviors in total joint replacement patients. Orthop Nurs 2000, 19(2):77-85.
• [16]van den Akker-Scheek I, Stevens M, Groothoff JW, Bulstra SK, Zijlstra W: Preoperative or postoperative self-efficacy: which is a better predictor of outcome after total hip or knee arthroplasty? Patient Educ Couns 2007, 66(1):92-99.
• [17]Wylde V, Dixon S, Blom AW: The role of preoperative self-efficacy in predicting outcome after total knee replacement. Musculoskeletal care 2012, 10(2):110-118.
• [18]Mitchell C, Walker J, Walters S, Morgan AB, Binns T, Mathers N: Costs and effectiveness of pre- and post-operative home physiotherapy for total knee replacement: randomized controlled trial. J Eval Clin Pract 2005, 11(3):283-292.
• [19]Russell TG, Buttrum P, Wootton R, Jull GA: Internet-based outpatient telerehabilitation for patients following total knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surgery Am volume 2011, 93(2):113-120.
• [20]Tousignant M, Moffet H, Boissy P, Corriveau H, Cabana F, Marquis F: A randomized controlled trial of home telerehabilitation for post-knee arthroplasty. J Telemed Telecare 2011, 17(4):195-198.
• [21]Kramer JF, Speechley M, Bourne R, Rorabeck C, Vaz M: Comparison of clinic- and home-based rehabilitation programs after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2003, 410:225-234.
• [22]Moffet H, Collet JP, Shapiro SH, Paradis G, Marquis F, Roy L: Effectiveness of intensive rehabilitation on functional ability and quality of life after first total knee arthroplasty: A single-blind randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2004, 85(4):546-556.
• [23]DOS Referenceprogram: Knænær osteotomi og primær knæalloplastik. [http://www.ortopaedi.dk/fileadmin/referennceprogram/Doc00000048.pdf webcite]. Accessed 8 July 2013
• [24]van den Akker-Scheek I, Zijlstra W, Groothoff JW, van Horn JR, Bulstra SK, Stevens M: Groningen orthopaedic exit strategy: Validation of a support program after total hip or knee arthroplasty. Patient Educ Couns 2007, 65(2):171-179.
• [25]Hørdam B, Sabroe S, Pedersen PU, Mejdahl S, Soballe K: Nursing intervention by telephone interviews of patients aged over 65 years after total hip replacement improves health status: a randomised clinical trial. Scand J Caring Sci 2010, 24(1):94-100.
• [26]Bellamy N: Womac Osteoarthritis Index. User Guide X. 2012.
• [27]Maurish M RI, Maurish M (Eds): The Short Form Family of health Survey Instruments In "User´s Manual for the SF-36v" Health Survey. 3rd edition. Lincoln, RI: QualityMetricIncorporated; 2011.
• [28]Schwarzer R: General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE). 2013. [http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~health/selfscal.htm webcite]. Accessed 8 July 2013
• [29]WMA Declaration of Helsinki - Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. 2013. [http://www.wma.net/en/30publications/10policies/b3/ webcite]. Accessed 8 July 2013
• [30]Björnvell C: Sygeplejerskens Dokumentation - en praktisk håndbog. Lund: Studentlittaratur; 2001.
• [31]Ehnfors E, Ehrenberg A, Thorell-Ekstrand I: VIPS-boken. Stockholm: Vårdförbundet; 1998.
• [32]Brazier JE, Harper R, Munro J, Walters SJ, Snaith ML: Generic and condition-specific outcome measures for people with osteoarthritis of the knee. Rheumatology 1999, 38(9):870-877.
• [33]Hashimoto H, Hanyu T, Sledge CB, Lingard EA: Validation of a Japanese patient-derived outcome scale for assessing total knee arthroplasty: comparison with Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index (WOMAC). J Orthopaedic Sci Off J Japanese Orthopaedic Assoc 2003, 8(3):288-293.
• [34]Dunbar MJ, Robertsson O, Ryd L, Lidgren L: Appropriate questionnaires for knee arthroplasty. Results of a survey of 3600 patients from The Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Registry. J Bone Joint surgery British volume 2001, 83(3):339-344.
• [35]Escobar A, Quintana JM, Bilbao A, Azkarate J, Guenaga JI: Validation of the Spanish version of the WOMAC questionnaire for patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis. Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. Clin Rheumatol 2002, 21(6):466-471.
• [36]Stucki G, Sangha O, Stucki S, Michel BA, Tyndall A, Dick W, Theiler R: Comparison of the WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities) osteoarthritis index and a self-report format of the self-administered Lequesne-Algofunctional index in patients with knee and hip osteoarthritis. Osteoarthr Cartil 1998, 6(2):79-86.
• [37]Escobar A, Quintana JM, Bilbao A, Arostegui I, Lafuente I, Vidaurreta I: Responsiveness and clinically important differences for the WOMAC and SF-36 after total knee replacement. Osteoarthr Cartil 2007, 15(3):273-280.
• [38]Escobar A, Quintana JM, Bilbao A, Azkarate J, Guenaga JI, Arenaza JC, Gutierrez LF: Effect of patient characteristics on reported outcomes after total knee replacement. Rheumatol 2007, 46(1):112-119.
• [39]Ware JE Jr, Gandek B: Overview of the SF-36 Health Survey and the International Quality of Life Assessment (IQOLA) Project. J Clin Epidemiol 1998, 51(11):903-912.
• [40]Ware JE Jr: SF-36 health survey update. Spine 2000, 25(24):3130-3139.
• [41]Luszczynska A, Gutiérrez-Doña B, Schwarzer R: General self-efficacy in various domains of human functioning. Evidence Five Countries Int J Psychol 2005, 40(2):80-89.
• [42]Tubach F, Ravaud P, Baron G, Falissard B, Logeart I, Bellemy N, Bombardier C, Felson D, Hochberg M, van der Heijde D, Doudados M: Evaluation of clinically relevant changes in patient reported outcomes in knee and hip osteoarthritis: the minimally important improvement. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2012, 93(2):192-199.
• [43]Mistiaen P, Poot E: Telephone follow-up, initiated by a hospital-based health professional, for postdischarge problems in patients discharged from hospital to home. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006, 4:CD004510.
• [44]Flather M, Delahunty N, Collinson J: Generalizing results of randomized trials to clinical practice: reliability and cautions. Clinical trials 2006, 3(6):508-512.
• [45]Juni P, Altman DG, Egger M: Systematic reviews in health care: Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials. BMJ 2001, 323(7303):42-46.
• [46]Boutron I, Tubach F, Giraudeau B, Ravaud P: Blinding was judged more difficult to achieve and maintain in nonpharmacologic than pharmacologic trials. J Clin Epidemiol 2004, 57(6):543-550.
• [47]Wood L, Egger M, Gluud LL, Schulz KF, Juni P, Altman DG, Gluud C, Martin RM, Wood AJ, Sterne JA: Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: meta-epidemiological study. BMJ 2008, 336(7644):601-605.
• [48]Schulz KF, Grimes DA: Blinding in randomised trials: hiding who got what. Lancet 2002, 359(9307):696-700.
• [49]Montori VM, Guyatt GH: Intention-to-treat principle. Can Med Assoc J 2001, 165(10):1339-1341.
• [50]Hollis S, Campbell F: What is meant by intention to treat analysis? Survey of published randomised controlled trials. BMJ 1999, 319(7211):670-674.
• [51]Boutron I, Moher D, Altman DG, Schulz KF, Ravaud P: Extending the CONSORT statement to randomized trials of nonpharmacologic treatment: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 2008, 148(4):295-309.
• [52]Baumann C, Rat AC, Osnowycz G, Mainard D, Cuny C, Guillemin F: Satisfaction with care after total hip and knee replacement predicts self-perceived health status after surgery. BMC Musculoskelet Disorder 2009, 10:150. BioMed Central Full Text
• [53]Baumann C, Rat AC, Osnowycz G, Mainard D, Cuny C, Guillemin F: Importance of patient satisfaction with care in predicting osteoarthritis-specific health-related quality of life one year after total joint arthroplasty. Qual Life Res 2011, 20:1581-1588.
• [54]Tunis SR, Stryer DB, Clancy CM: Practical clinical trials: increasing the value of clinical research for decision making in clinical and health policy. J Am Med Assoc 2003, 290(12):1624-1632.