Comparison of subacute rehabilitative care with outpatient primary medical care

Purpose: Prior rehabilitation outcome studies have had many weaknesses, but they gradually observe a lack of long-term benefits from inpatient care alone. The goal of this study was to measure the additive effect of outpatient, subacute rehabilitation (compared with usual outpatient primary medical care) for adults diagnosed with a disabling disorder in four major diagnostic groups (nervous, circulatory, musculoskeletal and injury). Method: A randomized clinical trial was conducted to determine the effects of outpatient, subacute rehabilitative care on: (1) physical function; (2) health; (3) well being; (4) family function; and (5) social support. Patients hospitalized for the first time with a disabling condition (n 180) were provided inpatient rehabilitation and then were randomly assigned to either outpatient, subacute rehabilitation at home (n 90) or to usual outpatient follow-up (n 90) in which only primary care medical services were provided. To compare the two groups, univariate analyses of covariance were conducted for the outcome variables. Results: The major finding of this study was that of no significant effect of the intervention on any outcome variable. Conclusions: Based on current study results, we conclude that any long term additive benefit of outpatient, subacute rehabilitation may not be detectable across disability categories and may require closer evaluation in studies with a more homogeneous population than in the current study. Providing complex follow-up case management services to all clients is apparently not beneficial and might better be provided using selection criteria based on need. Future studies should determine if services are more effective when provided to those with the most unmet rehabilitative needs. Further outpatient, subacute care rehabilitation studies should address the specific needs of the patients and be adapted individually to those needs.