ABSTRACT: Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) can be a significant cause of new long-term disability, which is thought to be amenable to multidisciplinary care. However, the evidence base of its effectiveness is unclear.
The aim of this systematic review is to assess the effectiveness of multidisciplinary care in adults with GBS, the types of approaches that are effective (setting, type, intensity) and the outcomes that are affected.
The search strategy comprised: The Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialized Register and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, PEDro, LILACS and CINAHL (up to May 2010). Selected studies included randomized and controlled clinical trials that compared multidisciplinary care in GBS with a control (routine local service, lower level of intervention); or studies that compared multidisciplinary care in different settings or at different levels of intensity of therapy. Best evidence synthesis was based on methodological quality. Three observational studies were also reported but they make limited contribution to evidence base synthesis.
No randomized or controlled clinical trials were identified. Evidence from three low-quality observational studies provide some support for improved disability in the short term (6 months) with high intensity rehabilitation; and for improved participation and quality of life.
The gaps in existing research should not be interpreted as ineffectiveness of multidisciplinary care in GBS. Appropriate and methodologically robust study designs, responsive outcome measures; and more research in the setting, type and intensity of rehabilitation are needed.
European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine 09/2011; 47(4):607-12. · 1.40 Impact Factor
ABSTRACT: To examine factors impacting long-term health-related outcomes in survivors of Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS). Seventy-six consecutive patients with definite GBS admitted to the Royal Melbourne Hospital (1996-2009) were reviewed in the neurorehabilitation clinics. They underwent a structured interview designed to assess the impact of GBS on their current activity and restriction in participation using validated questionnaires: Functional Independence Measure (FIM), Perceived Impact of Problem Profile (PIPP) and Depression Anxiety Stress Scale (DASS). Their sociodemographic and disease severity data were obtained from the medical record. The 76 patients [60% male, mean age 56 years, median time since GBS 6 years (range 1-14 years)] showed good functional recovery (median motor FIM score 90). However, 16% reported moderate to extreme impact on their ability to participate in work, family, and social activities; and 22% substantial impact on mood, confidence and ability to live independently. More reported moderate to extreme depression (18%), anxiety (22%) and stress (17%) compared with the normative Australian population (13%). Factors associated with poorer current level of functioning and wellbeing included: females, older patients (57+ years), acute hospital stay (>11 days), those treated in intensive care and those discharged to rehabilitation. No associations were found between the Medical Research Council (MRC) Motor Scale Rating scores at admission, nor time since GBS diagnosis (≤6 vs. >6 years) on outcomes used. Conclusion: GBS is complex and requires long-term management of psychological sequelae impacting activity and participation.
Journal of Neurology 12/2010; 257(12):2024-31. · 3.47 Impact Factor
ABSTRACT: Joint replacements are common procedures and treatment of choice for those with intractable joint pain and disability arising from arthropathy of the hip or knee. Multidisciplinary rehabilitation is considered integral to the outcome of joint replacement.
To assess the evidence for effectiveness of multidisciplinary rehabilitation on activity and participation in adults following hip or knee joint replacement for chronic arthropathy.
We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL up to September 2006.
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared organised multidisciplinary rehabilitation with routine services following hip or knee replacement, and included outcome measures of activity and participation in accordance with the International Classification of Functioning, Health and Disability (ICF).
Four authors independently extracted data and assessed methodological quality of included trials.
Five trials (619 participants) met the inclusion criteria; two addressed inpatient rehabilitation (261 participants) and three (358 participants) home-based settings. There were no trials addressing outpatient centre-based programmes. Pooling of data was not possible due to differences in study design and outcomes used. Methodological assessment showed all trials were of low quality. For inpatient settings early commencement of rehabilitation and clinical pathways led to more rapid attainment of functional milestones (disability) (Functional Independence Measure (FIM) transfer WMD 0.5, 95% CI 0.15, 0.85, number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) = 6, FIM ambulation WMD 1.55 (95%CI 0.96, 2.14), NNTB = 3), shorter hospital stay, fewer post-operative complications and reduced costs in the first three to four months. Home-based multidisciplinary care improved functional gain (Oxford Hip Score (OHS) WMD at 6 months -7.00 (95%CI -10.36, -3.64), NNT = 2 and quality of life (QoL) and reduced hospital stay in the medium term (six months). No trials addressed longer-term outcomes following hip replacement only.
Based on the heterogeneity and the low quality of the included trials that precluded pooled meta-analysis, there is silver level evidence that following hip or knee joint replacement, early multidisciplinary rehabilitation can improve outcomes at the level of activity and participation. The optimal intensity, frequency and effects of rehabilitation over a longer period and associated social costs need further study. Future research should focus on improving methodological and scientific rigour of clinical trials, and use of standardised outcome measures, so that results can be pooled for statistical analysis.
Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) 02/2008; · 5.72 Impact Factor