Key result
Prehabilitation before ACL reconstruction did not significantly change the number of sickness benefit days after surgery compared to postoperative physiotherapy alone (94.7 vs 87.1 days; p=0.092).
Why the study?
To compare healthcare use and days of sickness benefits between individuals receiving physiotherapy before and after ACL reconstruction versus after reconstruction only, and assess the association between preoperative healthcare and post-reconstruction recovery.
Does prehabilitation (physiotherapy before and after ACLR) reduce healthcare use and days of sickness benefits compared to physiotherapy after ACLR only in patients with ACL injury?
Cohort (n=1,143)
Does prehabilitation (physiotherapy before and after ACLR) reduce healthcare use and days of sickness benefits compared to physiotherapy after ACLR only in patients with ACL injury?
Absolute Event Rate: 94.7% vs 87.1%
p-value: p=0.092
Prehabilitation before ACL reconstruction was associated with higher healthcare utilization but did not significantly reduce the number of sickness benefit days after surgery.
Observational data on pre-ACLR physiotherapy; leaves open effects on sickness benefits and recovery pending randomized trials.
Objective To compare healthcare use and the number of days of sickness benefits between people with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury who received physiotherapy before and after ACL reconstruction (ACLR) and those who received physiotherapy after ACLR only. Secondary aim: to measure the association between the volume of preoperative healthcare and post-ACLR recovery.Methods Each individual’s care pathway was extracted from a section of the French National Health Data System (SNDS) database (province: Pays de La Loire). The database was queried for the codes related to sickness benefits and healthcare utilization, including physiotherapy, medical and paramedical visits and procedures, medication, and medical equipment provided up to six months before and eighteen months after the ACLR. (Registry/number: ClinicalTrials.gov/NCT05737719).Results Based on the timing of physiotherapy, two subcohorts were created from the database: ‘prehabilitation’ (n = 513) for those receiving physiotherapy before and after ACLR; ‘no prehabilitation’ (n = 630) for those only receiving physiotherapy after ACLR. Before ACLR, healthcare use was higher for the ‘prehabilitation’ group, including the number of medical visits (3.9 ± 2.3 vs. 3.0 ± 1.9 univariate p < 0.001), analgesia (mild opioids 60.4% vs. 49.8% univariate p < 0.001), dispensing of medical equipment (85.0% vs. 68.9% univariate p < 0.001) and sickness benefit days (52.7 ± 45.6 days vs. 33.2 ± 35.8 days, univariate p < 0.001). After ACLR, the ‘prehabilitation’ group underwent a higher number of physiotherapy sessions (46.8 ± 21.9 sessions vs 35.8 ± 19.0 sessions, p < 0.001) but had a similar number of sickness benefit days (94.7 ± 77.8 days vs 87.1 ± 69.9 days, p = 0.092). From the multivariate analysis (n = 1143): age, comorbidities, the preoperative number of sickness benefit days, and the number of physiotherapy sessions before ACLR explained 24% of the variance in days of sickness benefits after ACLR.Conclusion Prehabilitation was associated with higher healthcare utilization before and after ACLR. Prehabilitation, and other preoperative variables, explained only a part of the number of days of sickness benefits after ACLR.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sant et al. (2024) conducted a cohort in Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury (n=1,143). Prehabilitation (physiotherapy before and after ACL reconstruction) vs. Physiotherapy after ACL reconstruction only was evaluated on Number of days of sickness benefits after ACL reconstruction (p=0.092). Prehabilitation before ACL reconstruction did not significantly change the number of sickness benefit days after surgery compared to postoperative physiotherapy alone (94.7 vs 87.1 days; p=0.092).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: