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

Kirsten Szöts, Hanne Konradsen, Søren Solgaard, Birte Ostergaard, Kirsten Szöts, Hanne Konradsen, Søren Solgaard, Birte Ostergaard

Abstract

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.

Keywords: Health status; Self-efficacy; Telephone follow-up; Total knee arthroplasty.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow-chart for the trial.

References

    1. Sorci R. Increasing Incidence of Joint Replacements Burdens Healthcare Systems. 2013. [ ]. Accessed 8 July 2013.
    1. Dansk knæalloplastikregister - Årsrapport 2012. [ ]. Accessed 8 July 2013.
    1. Carr AJ, Robertsson O, Graves S, Price AJ, Arden NK, Judge A, Beard DJ. Knee replacement. Lancet. 2012;379(9823):1331–1340. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60752-6.
    1. 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.
    1. 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. doi: 10.1053/apmr.2001.21522.
    1. Kehlet H, Soballe K. Fast-track hip and knee replacement–what are the issues? Acta Orthop. 2010;81(3):271–272. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2010.487237.
    1. 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. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-6-112.
    1. 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. doi: 10.1097/00006416-200019010-00011. 62.
    1. 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.
    1. 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.
    1. 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. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-10-119.
    1. 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. doi: 10.1002/acr.20467.
    1. Bandura A. In: Encyclopedia of human behaviour. Ramachaudran VS, editor. Vol. 4. New York: Academic Press; 1994. Self-efficacy; pp. 71–81.
    1. Barlow J. In: International Encyclopedia of Rehabilitaition. Stone J, Blouin M, editor. Buffalo: Center for International Rehabilitation Research Information and Exchange (CIRRIE); 2013. Self-efficacy in the context of rehabilitation.
    1. 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. doi: 10.1097/00006416-200019020-00011.
    1. 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. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2006.10.012.
    1. 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. doi: 10.1002/msc.1008.
    1. 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. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2005.00535.x.
    1. 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.
    1. 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. doi: 10.1258/jtt.2010.100602.
    1. 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.
    1. 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. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2003.08.080.
    1. DOS Referenceprogram. Knænær osteotomi og primær knæalloplastik. [ ]. Accessed 8 July 2013.
    1. 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. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2006.07.004.
    1. 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. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6712.2009.00691.x.
    1. Bellamy N. Womac Osteoarthritis Index. User Guide X. 2012.
    1. Maurish M RI, Maurish M, editor. "User´s Manual for the SF-36v" Health Survey. 3. Lincoln, RI: QualityMetricIncorporated; 2011. The Short Form Family of health Survey Instruments.
    1. Schwarzer R. General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE) 2013. [ ]. Accessed 8 July 2013.
    1. WMA Declaration of Helsinki - Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. 2013. [ ]. Accessed 8 July 2013.
    1. Björnvell C. Sygeplejerskens Dokumentation - en praktisk håndbog. Lund: Studentlittaratur; 2001.
    1. Ehnfors E, Ehrenberg A, Thorell-Ekstrand I. VIPS-boken. Stockholm: Vårdförbundet; 1998.
    1. 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. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/38.9.870.
    1. 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. doi: 10.1007/s10776-002-0629-0.
    1. 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. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.83B3.11134.
    1. 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. doi: 10.1007/s100670200117.
    1. 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. doi: 10.1053/joca.1997.0097.
    1. 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. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2006.09.001.
    1. 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. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/kel184.
    1. 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. doi: 10.1016/S0895-4356(98)00081-X.
    1. Ware JE Jr. SF-36 health survey update. Spine. 2000;25(24):3130–3139. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200012150-00008.
    1. 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.
    1. 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. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2011.09.011.
    1. 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.
    1. Flather M, Delahunty N, Collinson J. Generalizing results of randomized trials to clinical practice: reliability and cautions. Clinical trials. 2006;3(6):508–512. doi: 10.1177/1740774506073464.
    1. Juni P, Altman DG, Egger M. Systematic reviews in health care: Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials. BMJ. 2001;323(7303):42–46. doi: 10.1136/bmj.323.7303.42.
    1. 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. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2003.12.010.
    1. 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. doi: 10.1136/.
    1. Schulz KF, Grimes DA. Blinding in randomised trials: hiding who got what. Lancet. 2002;359(9307):696–700. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(02)07816-9.
    1. Montori VM, Guyatt GH. Intention-to-treat principle. Can Med Assoc J. 2001;165(10):1339–1341.
    1. Hollis S, Campbell F. What is meant by intention to treat analysis? Survey of published randomised controlled trials. BMJ. 1999;319(7211):670–674. doi: 10.1136/bmj.319.7211.670.
    1. 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. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-148-4-200802190-00008.
    1. 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. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-10-150.
    1. 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. doi: 10.1007/s11136-011-9913-8.
    1. 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.

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren