17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Occupational Therapy in HomEcare Re-ablement Services (OTHERS): results of a feasibility randomised controlled trial

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objectives

          The objective of this study was to test the feasibility of conducting a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of an intervention targeted at activities of daily living (ADL), delivered by an occupational therapist, in homecare reablement.

          Design

          Feasibility parallel group RCT.

          Setting

          Single-site local authority homecare reablement service.

          Participants

          People referred for homecare reablement with ability to consent. Exclusion criteria were as follows: inability to speak English, receiving other community therapy services, needing two or more to assist transfer and receiving end-of-life care.

          Control

          ‘Usual care’ was 6 weeks of homecare reablement delivered by social care workers (no routine health professional input).

          Intervention

          A targeted ADL programme, delivered by an occupational therapist incorporating goal setting, teaching/practising techniques, equipment/adaptations and provision of advice/support. This was in addition to usual care.

          Outcome measures

          Aspects of feasibility including eligibility, recruitment, intervention delivery, attrition and suitability and sensitivity of outcome measures. Participant outcomes were personal and extended ADL, quality of life, falls and use of health and social care services.

          Results

          30 participants were recruited, 15 to each arm, which was 60% of those eligible. Data from 22 (73%) were analysed at 6 months. Of the 15 participants, 13 (86%) received the intervention and were able to set one or more ADL goals. There were improvements from baseline in both groups, although overall improvements were greater in the occupational therapy (OT) intervention group. The biggest threat to feasibility was a change in service configuration during the trial, involving additional occupational therapy input, affecting usual care and recruitment.

          Conclusions

          Despite the service reconfiguration, it was feasible to recruit and retain participants, deliver the intervention and collect outcome data that were responsive to change. The choice of primary outcome measure remains unclear. A further powered study is feasible and warranted; however, the design will require careful consideration because of ongoing national changes in service configurations.

          Trial registration number

          ISRCTN21710246; Results.

          Related collections

          Most cited references14

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The Barthel ADL Index: a reliability study.

          The Barthel Index is a valid measure of disability. In this study we investigated the reliability of four different methods of obtaining the score in 25 patients: self-report, asking a trained nurse who had worked with the patient for at least one shift, and separate testing by two skilled observers within 72 hours of admission. Analysis of total (summed) scores revealed a close correlation between all four methods: a difference of 4/20 points was likely to reflect a genuine difference. In individual items, most disagreement was minor and involved the definition of middle grades. Asking an informed nurse or relative was as reliable as testing, and is quicker.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Barthel index for stroke trials: development, properties, and application.

            Robust measures of functional outcome are required to determine treatment effects in stroke trials. Of the various measures available, the Barthel index (BI) is one of the more prevalent. We aimed to describe validity, reliability, and responsiveness (clinimetric properties) of the BI in stroke trials. Narrative review of published articles describing clinimetric properties or use of the BI as a stroke trial end point. Definitive statements on properties of BI are limited by heterogeneity in methodology of assessment and in the content of "BI" scales. Accepting these caveats, evidence suggests that BI is a valid measure of activities of daily living; sensitivity to change is limited at extremes of disability (floor and ceiling effects), and reliability of standard BI assessment is acceptable. However, these data may not be applicable to contemporary multicenter stroke trials. Substantial literature describing BI clinimetrics in stroke is available; however, questions remain regarding certain properties. The "BI" label is used for a number of instruments and we urge greater consistency in methods, content, and scoring. A 10-item scale, scoring 0 to 100 with 5-point increments, has been used in several multicenter stroke trials and it seems reasonable that this should become the uniform stroke trial BI.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A randomised controlled trial of the Home Independence Program, an Australian restorative home-care programme for older adults.

              A randomised controlled trial was conducted to test the effectiveness of the Home Independence Program (HIP), a restorative home-care programme for older adults, in reducing the need for ongoing services. Between June 2005 and August 2007, 750 older adults referred to a home-care service for assistance with their personal care participated in the study and received HIP or 'usual' home-care services. Service outcomes were compared at 3 and 12 months. Subgroups of 150 from each group were also compared on functional and quality of life measures. Data were analysed by 'intention-to-treat' and 'as-treated'. The intention-to-treat analysis showed at 3 and 12 months that the HIP group was significantly less likely to need ongoing personal care [Odds ratio (OR) = 0.18, 95% CI = 0.13-0.26, P < 0.001; OR = 0.22, 95% CI = 0.15-0.32, P < 0.001]. Both subgroups showed improvements on the individual outcome measures over time with the only significant differences being found at 12 months for Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) in the as-treated analysis. Contamination of the control group by an increased emphasis on independence across the home-care agency involved, together with other methodological problems encountered, is thought to account for the few differences between groups in individual outcomes. Despite no difference between the groups over time in their overall ADL scores, a significantly smaller proportion of the HIP group required assistance with bathing/showering, the most common reason for referral, at 3 and 12 months. The results support earlier findings that participating in a short-term restorative programme appears to reduce the need for ongoing home care. The implementation of such programmes more broadly throughout Australia could substantially offset the projected increase in demand for home care associated with the five-fold projected increase in numbers of the oldest old expected over the next 40 years.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2016
                15 August 2016
                : 6
                : 8
                : e011868
                Affiliations
                [1 ]School of Medicine, University of Nottingham , Nottingham, UK
                [2 ]School of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham , Nottingham, UK
                [3 ]Nottingham City Council , Nottingham, UK
                [4 ]Absoluteco , Nottingham, UK
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Phillip J Whitehead; phillip.j.whitehead@ 123456nottingham.ac.uk
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1310-4020
                Article
                bmjopen-2016-011868
                10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011868
                5013368
                27531732
                e41d4f8f-4dcc-4a58-86ef-b5af2b5ee286
                Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/

                This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt and build upon this work, for commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History
                : 11 March 2016
                : 10 June 2016
                : 18 July 2016
                Funding
                Funded by: Research Trainees Coordinating Centre, http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000659;
                Award ID: Doctoral Research Fellowship, DRF-2012-05-131
                Categories
                Rehabilitation Medicine
                Research
                1506
                1727
                1730

                Medicine
                occupational therapy,activities of daily living,homecare re-ablement,social care,prevention

                Comments

                Comment on this article