Trade-Offs with rehabilitation Effectiveness (REs) and Efficiency (REy) in a sample of Italian disabled persons in a in post-acuity rehabilitation unit.

BACKGROUND: Intensive Rehabilitation Centres, known in Italy as "code 56", admit patients who need to recover from an acute episode. Different Rehabilitation Impact Indices have been proposed as composite rehabilitation outcomes measuring the rate of improvement due to a rehabilitation program. The most widely employed measure the performance of Activities of daily living in rehabilitation is the modified Barthel Index. The Barthel Index-based Rehabilitation Impact Indices are the Rehabilitation Effectiveness and the Rehabilitation Efficiency. AIM: The aim of our study was to evaluate the trade-off between Rehabilitation Effectiveness tayand Rehabilitation Efficiency with respect to the Barthel Index admission score and the Length Of Stay, and their ideal ranges that optimized both indices. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated data of all patients admitted to intensive rehabilitation unit of the Scientific Institute for Research and Healthcare San Raffaele Pisana of Rome, from January 2006 to March 2018. The primary outcome measures of our study were patient's Rehabilitation Effectiveness and Rehabilitation Efficiency during the hospital stay. RESULTS: A database of 3,466 patients was analysed and the Rehabilitation Effectiveness and Rehabilitation Efficiency indexes were calculated. We calculated the median rank ratio of the Rehabilitation Effectiveness to the Rehabilitation Efficiency against Barthel Index scores. We calculated the median rank ratio of the Rehabilitation Effectiveness to Rehabilitation Efficiency against Barthel Index scores and days of stay. The median rank ratio of the Rehabilitation Effectiveness to the Rehabilitation Efficiency value were 1 in the range of Barthel Index scores from 32 to 42. The median rank ratio of the Rehabilitation Effectiveness to Rehabilitation Efficiency value were 1 for a Length of Stay corresponding to 33 days. CONCLUSIONS: In our study we calculated the Trade-offs between Rehabilitation Effectiveness and Rehabilitation Efficiency with respect to admission Barthel Index Score and Length Of Stay in a population of 3,466 patients affected by orthopedic (1,707) and neurological (1,759) diseases. Every member of the healthcare team should be aware of such trade-offs when they make decisions about rehabilitation services.

Perceptive rehabilitation of patients with non-specific chronic low back pain: the role of body midline. A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Surface for perceptive rehabilitation (Su-Per treatment) is a hopeful therapeutic system in the treatment of non-specific chronic low back pain (CLBP). During treatment, some patients poorly tolerate the presence of the less elastic cones at the back midline. AIM: To assess the importance of an increased awareness of body midline through higher stimulus at interspinous line during Su-Per treatment for non-specific CLBP. DESIGN: Single-blind, randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: Outpatient academic hospital. POPULATION: Forty patients with non-specific CLBP, for at least 12 weeks before treatment. METHODS: The patients were distributed in 2 groups: Group A (20 patients) received standard Su-Per treatment; Group B (20 patients) received Su-Per treatment without higher stimulus at interspinous line. Pain was assessed using the Visual Analogue Scale and the Present Pain Intensity and Pain Rating Index of the McGill Pain Questionnaire. Disability was evaluated using the Oswestry Disability Index. RESULTS: In both groups, a significant reduction of pain and disability scores was observed at the first follow-up (end of treatment), and was maintained at later evaluations (4-weeks, and 12-weeks follow up). No significant difference was observed between the two groups in all outcome measures at all time points (P>0.05 for all). CONCLUSION: Su-Per treatment is a valid modality in a cognitive-perceptive therapeutic concept for non-specific CLBP. It does not necessarily require external stimulation of the body midline to be effective. CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: Modifying the standard distribution of the cones, without less deformable cones along interspinous line, makes the Su-Per treatment more acceptable to patients.