Pre-operative physiotherapy rehabilitation programmes improve the outcomes of treatment following anterior cruciate ligament injury

Alshewaier, Shady Abdullah; Yeowell, Gillian; Fatoye, Francis

doi:10.1016/j.physio.2015.03.595

Cited by 3 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In comparison to the results of the overview by McIsaac et al 2022 [ 6 ], the included EEs on cancer surgery showed more beneficial results regarding morbidity [ 32 – 34 , 43 , 46 , 55 ] and mortality [ 41 , 50 , 55 ], and the included EEs on orthopaedic surgery showed more beneficial results on health-related quality of life (HrQoL) [ 37 , 42 , 47 , 48 , 53 ]. Apart from that, results were comparable but, overall, the included EEs’ results appear more beneficial suggesting a risk of publication bias.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…In total, 45 unique studies were included: 25 completed EEs [ 29 – 34 , 37 – 55 ] and 20 ongoing studies, of which 11 were published as protocol articles [ 56 – 66 ] and nine as registration records [ 67 – 75 ]. Two completed EEs were only published as conference abstracts [ 53 , 54 ] and two as dissertations [ 37 , 49 ]. A total of 54 email enquiries were sent to the study authors, of which 23 were answered (response rate 42.6%).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Four trial-based EEs [ 37 , 42 , 48 , 53 ] reported data on the primary outcome, i.e. cost-effectiveness based on CUA (Fig.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Based on direction of effects, three CUAs (75%) fell into the cost-effective category, and one fell into the category ‘unclear; incremental analysis required’. The ICER of the latter study was 7906 EUR (2020) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained, which is likely acceptable under common willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds [ 37 ].

Fig.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Cost-effectiveness of prehabilitation prior to elective surgery: a systematic review of economic evaluations

Rombey,

Eckhardt,

Kiselev

et al. 2023

BMC Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Prehabilitation aims at enhancing patients’ functional capacity and overall health status to enable them to withstand a forthcoming stressor like surgery. Our aim was to synthesise the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of prehabilitation for patients awaiting elective surgery compared with usual preoperative care. Methods We searched PubMed, Embase, the CRD database, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO ICTRP and the dissertation databases OADT and DART. Studies comparing prehabilitation for patients with elective surgery to usual preoperative care were included if they reported cost outcomes. All types of economic evaluations (EEs) were included. The primary outcome of the review was cost-effectiveness based on cost–utility analyses (CUAs). The risk of bias of trial-based EEs was assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias 2 tool and the ROBINS-I tool and the credibility of model-based EEs with the ISPOR checklist. Methodological quality of full EEs was assessed using the CHEC checklist. The EEs’ results were synthesised narratively using vote counting based on direction of effect. Results We included 45 unique studies: 25 completed EEs and 20 ongoing studies. Of the completed EEs, 22 were trial-based and three model-based, corresponding to four CUAs, three cost-effectiveness analyses, two cost–benefit analyses, 12 cost–consequence analyses and four cost-minimization analyses. Three of the four trial-based CUAs (75%) found prehabilitation cost-effective, i.e. more effective and/or less costly than usual care. Overall, 16/25 (64.0%) EEs found prehabilitation cost-effective. When excluding studies of insufficient credibility/critical risk of bias, this number reduced to 14/23 (60.9%). In 8/25 (32.0%), cost-effectiveness was unclear, e.g. because prehabilitation was more effective and more costly, and in one EE prehabilitation was not cost-effective. Conclusions We found some evidence that prehabilitation for patients awaiting elective surgery is cost-effective compared to usual preoperative care. However, we suspect a relevant risk of publication bias, and most EEs were of high risk of bias and/or low methodological quality. Furthermore, there was relevant heterogeneity depending on the population, intervention and methods. Future EEs should be performed over a longer time horizon and apply a more comprehensive perspective. Trial registration PROSPERO CRD42020182813.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Four trial-based EEs [ 37 , 42 , 48 , 53 ] reported data on the primary outcome, i.e. cost-effectiveness based on CUA (Fig.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fig.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Cost-effectiveness of prehabilitation prior to elective surgery: a systematic review of economic evaluations

Rombey,

Eckhardt,

Kiselev

et al. 2023

BMC Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In total, 45 unique studies were included: 25 completed EEs (27)(28)(29)(30)(31)(32)(35)(36)(37)(38)(39)(40)(41)(42)(43)(44)(45)(46)(47)(48)(49)(50)(51)(52)(53) and 20 ongoing studies, of which 11 were published as protocol articles (54-64) and nine as registration records (65-73). Two completed EEs were only published as conference abstracts (51,52) and two as dissertations (35,47). A total of 54 email enquiries were sent to the study authors, of which 23 were answered (response rate 42.6%).…”

Section: Study Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost-effectiveness of prehabilitation prior to elective surgery: A systematic review of economic evaluations

Rombey,

Eckhardt,

Kiselev

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Prehabilitation aims at enhancing patients’ functional capacity and overall health status to enable them to withstand a forthcoming stressor like surgery. Our aim was to synthesise the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of prehabilitation for patients awaiting elective surgery compared with usual preoperative care. Methods We searched PubMed, Embase, the CRD database, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO ICTRP and the dissertation databases OADT and DART. Studies comparing prehabilitation for patients with elective surgery to usual preoperative care were included if they reported cost outcomes. All types of economic evaluations (EEs) were included regardless of design, analysis type and completion status. The primary outcome of the review was cost-effectiveness based on cost-utility analyses (CUAs). The risk of bias of trial-based EEs was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool and the ROBINS-I tool, and the credibility of model-based EEs with the ISPOR checklist. Methodological quality of full EEs was assessed using the CHEC checklist. The EEs’ results were synthesised narratively using vote counting based on direction of effect. Results We included 45 unique studies: 25 completed EEs and 20 ongoing studies. Among the completed EEs, there were 22 trial-based EEs, and three model-based EEs, corresponding to four CUAs, three cost-effectiveness analyses, two cost-benefit analyses, 12 cost-consequence analyses and four cost-minimization analyses. Three of the four trial-based CUAs (75%) found prehabilitation cost-effective. Overall, 16/25 (64.0%) EEs found prehabilitation cost-effective based on direction of effects. When excluding studies of insufficient credibility/critical risk of bias, this number reduced to 14/23 (60.9%). In 8/25 (32.0%) cost-effectiveness was unclear, and in one EE prehabilitation was not cost-effective. Discussion We found some evidence that prehabilitation for patients awaiting elective surgery is cost-effective compared to usual preoperative care. However, we suspect a relevant risk of publication bias, and most EEs were of high risk of bias and/or low methodological quality. Furthermore, there was relevant heterogeneity depending on the population, intervention, and methods. Future EEs should be performed over a longer time horizon and apply a more comprehensive perspective. Funding information and systematic review registration Funding: Innovationsausschuss of the Federal Joint Committee (G-BA) (01NVF18024). Registration: PROSPERO CRD42020182813.

show abstract

Knowledge and awareness toward anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury among population of Aseer region, Saudi Arabia

Shaker

Alshehri

et al. 2019

J Family Med Prim Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The aim of this article is to determine the knowledge and awareness of population toward anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury in Aseer region, and to determine the extent of knowledge about what does a person with ACL injury suffer from, and thus investigate the main sources of information that public obtained their medical information about sport injury from. Materials and Methods: This is a cross-sectional study based on a questionnaire distributed to the participants either in malls, campuses, or campaigns and filled by them in Aseer region. A sample of 576 participants was successfully interviewed. Convenience sampling method was used. Results: Nearly all of the participants considered this injury as a multi-factorial incident resulting from a combination of any of the following risk factors: sports, high body weight, heavy housework, and car accidents. Regarding mechanisms responsible about occurrence of ACL injuries during playing sports, the majority (60.8%) proposed a combination of two or more incorrect technical movements: lack of self-protection awareness, insufficient preparation, and overload of exercise. Regarding the participant's information about methods that could decrease pain of ACL injury, about three quarters of all participants (72.2%) stated that resting could alleviate pain. Moreover, most of individuals with previous ACL injury confirmed this. In addition, those with pervious ACL injury supported the role of ice significantly more than the remainder (53.6% vs. 48.1%). Prescription pain medications were selected by 47.3% of all participants. In all, 53.8% of all participants considered Internet as a main source of information about ACL injury. Conclusion: Findings indicated reasonable awareness of the general population in Aseer region about the seriousness of ACL injury, but there was a lack of information about risk factors other than sports, that is, dangerous actions that increase incidence of ACL injuries and their characteristic symptoms.

show abstract

Pre-operative physiotherapy rehabilitation programmes improve the outcomes of treatment following anterior cruciate ligament injury

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

Cost-effectiveness of prehabilitation prior to elective surgery: a systematic review of economic evaluations

Cost-effectiveness of prehabilitation prior to elective surgery: a systematic review of economic evaluations

Cost-effectiveness of prehabilitation prior to elective surgery: A systematic review of economic evaluations

Knowledge and awareness toward anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury among population of Aseer region, Saudi Arabia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About