Background. The Treatment Beliefs Questionnaire has been developed to measure patients’ beliefs of necessity of and concerns about rehabilitation. Preliminary evidence suggests that these beliefs may be associated with attendance of rehabilitation. The aim of this study was to translate and adapt the Treatment Beliefs Questionnaire for interdisciplinary pain rehabilitation and to examine the measurement properties of the Dutch translation including the predictive validity for dropout. Methods. The questionnaire was translated in 4 steps: forward translation from English into Dutch, achieving consensus, back translation into English, and pretesting on providers and patients. In order to establish structural validity, internal consistency, construct validity, and predictive validity of the questionnaire, 188 participants referred to a rehabilitation centre for outpatient interdisciplinary pain rehabilitation completed the questionnaire at the baseline. Dropout was measured as the number of patients starting, but not completing the programme. For reproducibility, 51 participants were recruited at another rehabilitation centre to complete the questionnaire at the baseline and one week later. Results. We confirmed the structural validity of the Treatment beliefs Questionnaire in the Dutch translation with three subscales, necessity, concerns, and perceived barriers. internal consistency was acceptable with ordinal alphas ranging from 0.66–0.87. Reproducibility was acceptable with ICC2,1 agreement ranging from 0.67–0.81. Hypotheses testing confirmed construct validity, similar to the original questionnaire. Predictive validity showed the questionnaire was unable to predict dropouts. Conclusion. Cross-cultural translation was successfully completed, and the Dutch Treatment Beliefs Questionnaire demonstrates similar psychometric properties as the original English version.
BACKGROUND: Regaining walking ability is a key target in geriatric rehabilitation. This study evaluated the prevalence of walking ability at (pre-)admission and related clinical characteristics in a cohort of geriatric rehabilitation inpatients; in inpatients without walking ability, feasibility and effectiveness of progressive resistance exercise training (PRT) were assessed.METHODS: Inpatients within RESORT, an observational, longitudinal cohort of geriatric rehabilitation inpatients, were stratified in those with and without ability to walk independently (defined by Functional Ambulation Classification (FAC) score ≤ 2) at admission; further subdivision was performed by pre-admission walking ability. Clinical characteristics at admission, length of stay, and changes in physical and functional performance throughout admission were compared depending on (pre-)admission walking ability. Feasibility (relative number of PRT sessions given and dropout rate) and effectiveness [change in Short Physical Performance Battery, FAC, independence in (instrumental) activities of daily living (ADL/IADL)] of PRT (n = 11) in a subset of inpatients without ability to walk independently at admission (able to walk pre-admission) were investigated compared with usual care (n = 11) (LIFT-UP study).RESULTS: Out of 710 inpatients (median age 83.5 years; 58.0% female), 52.2% were not able to walk independently at admission, and 7.6% were not able to walk pre-admission. Inpatients who were not able to walk independently at admission, had a longer length of stay, higher prevalence of cognitive impairment and frailty and malnutrition risk scores, and a lower improvement in independence in (I)ADL compared with inpatients who were able to walk at both admission and pre-admission. In LIFT-UP, the relative median number of PRT sessions given compared with the protocol (twice per weekday) was 11 out of 44. There were no dropouts. PRT improved FAC (P = 0.028) and ADL (P = 0.034) compared with usual care.CONCLUSIONS: High prevalence of inpatients who are not able to walk independently and its negative impact on independence in (I)ADL during geriatric rehabilitation highlights the importance of tailored interventions such as PRT, which resulted in improvement in FAC and ADL.
AIM: To synthesize the evidence about the characteristics (frequency, intensity, time, type) and effects of physical rehabilitation interventions on functional recovery and performance in daily functioning in children and young people with acquired brain injury (ABI), including traumatic brain injuries (TBI) and non-TBI, during the subacute rehabilitation phase.METHOD: Using scoping review methodology, a systematic literature search was performed using four databases. Articles were screened by title and abstract and data from eligible studies were extracted for synthesis.RESULTS: Nine of 3009 studies were included. The results demonstrated a variety of intervention characteristics: frequency varied between 1 and 7 days per week; time of intervention varied between 25 minutes and 6 hours a day; intervention types were specified in seven studies; and none of the included studies reported details of intensity of intervention. All studies reported positive results on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: Children and Youth (ICF-CY) levels of body function and activities after the intervention period, with study designs of included studies being cohort studies without concurrent controls (n=7) or case reports (n=2).INTERPRETATION: Inconsistency in results hampers generalizability to guide clinical practice. Physical interventions during subacute rehabilitation have potential to improve functional recovery with intervention characteristics as an important factor influencing its effectiveness. Future well-designed studies are indicated to gain knowledge and optimize rehabilitation practice in paediatric ABI and high-quality research including outcomes across all ICF-CY domains is needed.
Low back pain is the leading cause of disability worldwide and a significant contributor to work incapacity. Although effective therapeutic options are scarce, exercises supervised by a physiotherapist have shown to be effective. However, the effects found in research studies tend to be small, likely due to the heterogeneous nature of patients' complaints and movement limitations. Personalized treatment is necessary as a 'one-size-fits-all' approach is not sufficient. High-tech solutions consisting of motions sensors supported by artificial intelligence will facilitate physiotherapists to achieve this goal. To date, physiotherapists use questionnaires and physical examinations, which provide subjective results and therefore limited support for treatment decisions. Objective measurement data obtained by motion sensors can help to determine abnormal movement patterns. This information may be crucial in evaluating the prognosis and designing the physiotherapy treatment plan. The proposed study is a small cohort study (n=30) that involves low back pain patients visiting a physiotherapist and performing simple movement tasks such as walking and repeated forward bending. The movements will be recorded using sensors that estimate orientation from accelerations, angular velocities and magnetometer data. Participants complete questionnaires about their pain and functioning before and after treatment. Artificial analysis techniques will be used to link the sensor and questionnaire data to identify clinically relevant subgroups based on movement patterns, and to determine if there are differences in prognosis between these subgroups that serve as a starting point of personalized treatments. This pilot study aims to investigate the potential benefits of using motion sensors to personalize the treatment of low back pain. It serves as a foundation for future research into the use of motion sensors in the treatment of low back pain and other musculoskeletal or neurological movement disorders.
