Prevention of chronic pain and disability in patients with blunt chest wall trauma Signs and Symptoms
Conditions
Interventions
Patients will be randomised (patient level) to the trial using a 1:1 ratio, using Sealed Envelope (https://www.sealedenvelope.com), an independent company which is available 24 hours per day. Two stra
the number of radiologically proven or clinically suspected rib fractures and the clinical frailty score, using the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) of the patient, specifically: Number of rib fractures:
Sponsors
Swansea Bay University Health Board
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
All
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: 1. Presenting to hospital with a diagnosis of isolated blunt chest wall trauma (defined as any injury ranging from bruising to the chest wall to rib fractures with or without underlying injury to the lung, and no concurrent injuries that preclude completion of the exercise programme) 2. Aged 16 years or above 3. Able to either give informed consent independently, or with support of a family member/carer or translator 4. Able to either complete the exercise programme independently, or with support of a family member/carer 5. Able to complete surveys independently, or with support of a family member/carer or translator
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: 1. Lacking sufficient capacity to provide informed consent or complete surveys. (Assistance from a family member/carer or translator is acceptable, if needed.) 2. Lacking sufficient capacity to complete the exercise programme either independently, or with the support of a family member/carer 3. Aged under 16 years 4. Presenting with immediately life-threatening injuries or any concurrent injury precluding participation in the intervention (patients with minor injuries not precluding participation, such as a concurrent knee ligament injury, will still be eligible) 5. Hospitalised prisoners
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| 1. Chronic pain is measured using the Brief Pain Inventory (short form) at baseline and 3 months follow-up 2. Disability is measured using the EQ5D-5L Survey at baseline and 3 months follow-up | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| 1. Cost-effectiveness measured using a cost-utility (incremental cost per QALY) analysis at 3 month follow-up 2. Safety measured using rate of adverse events and serious adverse events at 3-month follow-up 3. Acceptability of programme measured using five focus groups, one per participating site, in intervention group only at end of 3-month follow-up | — |
Countries
England, United Kingdom, Wales
Outcome results
None listed