Long-Term Change and Predictors of Change in Physical and Mental Function after Rehabilitation: A Multi-Centre Study.
Anne Mette Berget, Vegard Pihl Moen, Merethe Hustoft and 4 others
PMID 36601734WHAT IT FOUND
Rehabilitation patients reported modest improvements in physical and mental function that persisted for 3 years.
Patients with lower coping resources at baseline showed the greatest mental health gains, while those with higher coping resources improved more physically. Neurological patients improved more slowly than other groups.
Key findings
01Mean physical function scores improved by 2.9 points from baseline to 1 year and 3.4 points from baseline to 3 years on a 0-100 scale.
02Patients with lower sense of coherence at baseline showed greater improvement in mental function scores, whereas patients with higher sense of coherence showed greater improvement in physical function scores.
03Patients with neurological diseases showed the least improvement in physical function at 1 year, but their scores increased further by 3 years, unlike other disease groups where improvement plateaued.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Low baseline response rate (34% of eligible participants), and the study cohort was older, better educated, and had higher coping scores than those who dropped out, potentially limiting generalizability. No measurement at discharge, so it is impossible to separate the effect of the rehabilitation intervention itself from natural recovery or other factors. Specific content of rehabilitation varied across centres and was not recorded, so it is unclear which components drove the changes. Only three measurement points (baseline, 1 year, 3 years) may have missed nuanced patterns of change. The study population excluded patients with severe functional limitations who receive hospital-based specialized care.
Declared interests
The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the observed improvements as a direct effect of the rehabilitation intervention. The study had no discharge measurement, did not record specific treatment content, and lacked a control group, so the changes could reflect natural recovery, other interventions, or regression to the mean.