A comparison of patients' and physiotherapists' expectations about walking post spinal cord injury: a longitudinal cohort study
Study design: A longitudinal cohort study. Objective: The primary objective of this study was to compare the expectations that patients with recent spinal cord injury (SCI) had about walking 1 year from injury with the expectations of their physiotherapists. Setting: Two Sydney SCI units. Methods: A...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Spinal cord 2012-07, Vol.50 (7), p.548-552 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Study design:
A longitudinal cohort study.
Objective:
The primary objective of this study was to compare the expectations that patients with recent spinal cord injury (SCI) had about walking 1 year from injury with the expectations of their physiotherapists.
Setting:
Two Sydney SCI units.
Methods:
A consecutive series of 47 patients admitted to the metropolitan SCI units was recruited. Using the Mobility Scale, expectations of the patients and their physiotherapists about walking at 1 year from SCI were recorded at the time of admission to rehabilitation. Ability to walk was then assessed at 1 year from the SCI.
Results:
On admission to rehabilitation, 31 patients expected to walk about their homes at 1 year post SCI, but only 18 (58%) of these patients did so. In contrast, physiotherapists expected 21 patients to be able to walk about their homes at 1 year post SCI, with 17 (81%) of these patients doing so. Similarly, whereas 21 patients expected to walk about the community at 1 year post SCI, only 11 (52%) of these patients did so. Physiotherapists expected 8 patients to walk about the community at 1 year post SCI and 7 (88%) of these patients did so. The differences between patients' and physiotherapists' expectations about walking were statistically significant (
P |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1362-4393 1476-5624 |
DOI: | 10.1038/sc.2012.1 |