The effectiveness of rehabilitation after a Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA): A comparison of Usual Care in the Netherlands versus Germany

Conditions

M16.0 M16.1 M16.2 M16.3 M16.6 M16.7

Wijnen A, Seeber GH, Dietz G, Dijkstra B, Dekker JS, Vermeulen KM, Slager GEC, Hessel A, Lazovic D, Bulstra SK, Stevens M.

2023-06-275 citations

10.1186/s12891-023-06654-w

Effectiveness of a Home-Based Rehabilitation Program After Total Hip Arthroplasty Driven by a Tablet App and Remote Coaching: Nonrandomized Controlled Trial Combining a Single-Arm Intervention Cohort With Historical Controls

Annet Wijnen, Jildou Hoogland, Tjerk Munsterman, Carina LE Gerritsma, B.W. Dijkstra et al. (12 authors)

JMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies2020-01-2440 citations

10.2196/14139

Effectiveness of rehabilitation after a total hip arthroplasty: a protocol for an observational study for the comparison of usual care in the Netherlands versus Germany

Gesine H. Seeber, Annet Wijnen, Djordje Lazovic, Sjoerd K. Bulstra, Günter Dietz et al. (7 authors)

BMJ Open2017-08-0128 citations

10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016020

Interventions

Group 1: The German cohort is the intervention group. After THA surgery, the patients stay for 3 weeks in a inpatient rehabilitation clinic. Evaluation of medical effectiveness takes place pre-operati

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

All

Age

18 Years to 65 Years

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: (1) Patients are aged between 18-65, (2) showing clinical evidence of hip OA according to Altman et al. (1991), (3) showing radiological evidence of hip OA according to the Hellgren & Lawrence scale grade 1-3, (4) implantation of a Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA), (5) willing to go to a inpatient rehabiliation clinic (German cohort)

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Patients will be excluded form the study if they are (1) suffering from medical conditions that disallow safe participation in a rehab program (2) cognitive impaired, (3) not able to read and understand German or Dutch, (4) participation on another scientific research in the previous 30 days, (5) participation on another scientific research in the same time.

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
In order to determine the medical effectiveness both self-reported (HOOS, SF-36, PASS) and objective assessments (Timed up and Go Test (TUG), 5 Timed Sit to Stand Test (5-TSST)) will be applied. Measurements will be performed pre-surgical (T0), at 4 weeks (T1) and 12 weeks (T2) as well as 6 months (T3) post-surgical.	—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
Economic evaluation from a societal perspective. Direct and indirect costs will be evaluated. Evaluation will take place via settlement data from the hospitals (DRG/DGC)/rehab center (daily rates) and with a cost evaluation questionnaire. In that, patients are asked to provide information regarding absenteeism due to hip related problems, necessity and frequency of visiting a doctor, use of pain medication, time to resumption of work, volume of employment, change of work or retraining (if any), early retirement etc.	—

Measure

Time frame

Economic evaluation from a societal perspective. Direct and indirect costs will be evaluated. Evaluation will take place via settlement data from the hospitals (DRG/DGC)/rehab center (daily rates) and with a cost evaluation questionnaire. In that, patients are asked to provide information regarding absenteeism due to hip related problems, necessity and frequency of visiting a doctor, use of pain medication, time to resumption of work, volume of employment, change of work or retraining (if any), early retirement etc.

—

Countries

Germany, Netherlands

Contacts

Public ContactGesine;Annet Seeber (MSc);Wijnen (MSc)

Universitätsklinik für Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie am medizinischen Campus im Pius-Hospital;University Medical Center Groningen; Department of Orthopedics; Secretariaat Orthopedie BB51

gesine.seeber@uni-oldenburg.de;a.wijnen@umcg.nl0441-2291588;0031503611221

Outcome results

None listed