• Spine · Nov 2013

    Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study

    Early versus late initiation of rehabilitation after lumbar spinal fusion: economic evaluation alongside a randomized controlled trial.

    • Lisa G Oestergaard, Finn B Christensen, Claus V Nielsen, Cody E Bünger, Soeren Fruensgaard, and Rikke Sogaard.
    • From the Departments of *Physiotherapy and Occupational Therapy Department, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark †Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark ‡Region Hospital of Silkeborg, Orthopaedic Department, Denmark §Section of Social Medicine and Rehabilitation, Institute of Public Health, Aarhus University, Denmark ¶Public Health and Quality Improvement, Central Denmark Region, Denmark ‖CAST-Centre for Applied Health Services Research, University of Southern Denmark, Denmark; and **Institute for Public Health, Aarhus University, Denmark.
    • Spine. 2013 Nov 1;38(23):1979-85.

    Study DesignEconomic evaluation conducted alongside a randomized controlled trial with 1-year follow-up.ObjectiveTo examine the cost-effectiveness of initiating rehabilitation 6 weeks after surgery as opposed to 12 weeks after surgery.Summary Of Background DataIn a previously reported randomized controlled trial, we assessed the impact of timing of rehabilitation after a lumbar spinal fusion and found that a fast-track strategy led to poorer functional ability. Before making recommendations, it seems relevant to address the societal perspective including return to work, quality of life, and costs.MethodsA cost-effectiveness analysis and a cost-utility analysis were conducted. Eighty-two patients undergoing instrumented lumbar spinal fusion due to degenerative disc disease or spondylolisthesis (grade I or II) were randomized to an identical protocol of 4 sessions of group-based rehabilitation and were instructed in home exercises focusing on active stability training. Outcome parameters included functional disability (Oswestry Disability Index) and quality-adjusted life years. Health care and productivity costs were estimated from national registries and reported in euros. Costs and effects were transformed into net benefit. Bootstrapping was used to estimate 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).ResultsThe fast-track strategy tended to be costlier by €6869 (95% CI, -4640 to 18,378) while at the same time leading to significantly poorer outcomes of functional disability by -9 points (95% CI, -18 to -3) and a tendency for a reduced gain in quality-adjusted life years by -0.04 (95% CI, -0.13 to 0.01). The overall probability for the fast-track strategy being cost-effective does not reach 10% at conventional thresholds for cost-effectiveness.ConclusionInitiating rehabilitation at 6 weeks as opposed to 12 weeks after surgery is on average more costly and less effective. The uncertainty of this result did not seem to be sensitive to methodological issues, and clinical managements who have already adapted fast-track rehabilitation strategies have reason to reconsider their choice. .

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…