Hip precautions after total hip replacement and their discontinuation from practice: patient perceptions and experiences

Background: Hip precautions are routinely provided to reduce the risk of dislocation following total hip replacement despite evidence suggesting they provide no additional benefit and may, actually, impede recovery. Our aim was to report the views of patients who had been recruited into a trial comparing outcomes in participants who were prescribed hip precautions with those who were not. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted. Topics explored included experiences and opinions of the service (either hip precautions or no hip precautions), information offered, and equipment provided. Thematic analysis was used to identify and report themes. Results: Six themes were identified: perceived justification, and advantages and disadvantages for the postoperative recovery regime prescribed, perceived risk, and fear of dislocation, adherence to the postoperative regime prescribed, and experiences of adaptive equipment. Conclusions: Participants who received hip precautions had mixed views about their use: some felt they were restrictive whilst others believed they provided reassurance. Participants who did not receive hip precautions were less anxious about dislocating their hip but were unsure how to progress their rehabilitation. The discontinuation of precautions may decrease patients’ fears about dislocation but more guidance from rehabilitation staff about how to move safely during recovery is required.Implications for rehabilitation Hip precautions may unnecessarily exacerbate patients’ anxieties and fear about dislocation following total hip replacement. Hip precautions impact on patients’ recovery both physically and psychologically. Patients should be advised about moving and returning to activities following total hip replacement, whether they receive hip precautions or not

Clinicians’ experiences of discontinuing routine hip precautions following total hip replacement surgery: a qualitative analysis

PurposeHip precautions are routinely provided in the UK, despite evidence suggesting that they are no longer needed. A change in practice was introduced into an orthopaedic service whereby the provision of routine hip precautions was discontinued for selected individuals receiving a primary total hip replacement. The change involved implementing a new regime of “no precautions” which was facilitated using a number of key strategies. The aim of this study was to explore the experiences of clinicians associated with the change in practice.Material and methodsIndividual semi-structured interviews were conducted with clinicians who had experience of delivering both hip precautions and no hip precaution regimes. Data were analysed thematically.ResultsTen orthopaedic staff (two senior occupational therapists, one occupational therapy support worker, three senior physiotherapists, two surgeons, and two senior nurses) were interviewed. Three main themes were identified: changes experienced, perceptions of the new regime, and challenges experienced.ConclusionSeveral barriers and facilitators to the successful changeover were identified. Successful strategies in changing practice included assigning “Hip Champions”, staff education and targeted training. It is proposed that holding multidisciplinary education and training would be the ideal model. Implications for rehabilitation - Key strategies for changing practice were educating staff and providing targeted training.- Multidisciplinary training might prevent discrepancies in the advice given to patients.- Appointing “Hip Champions” provided clear role models and enabled new clinical behaviours to be enforced

Exercise as a therapeutic intervention in chronic kidney disease:are we nearly there yet?

Purpose of review: The opportunity to review the more recent evidence for prescribing exercise-based physical rehabilitation for people living with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is timely. There has been a recent global focus evaluating how physical activity interventions might improve health-related quality of life and outcomes for people living with chronic health conditions in a post-COVID era. There is finally a long overdue commitment from the kidney research and clinical community to deliver pragmatic interventions to help people living with CKD to be able to live well with their condition.Recent findings: This article reviews recent research, and discusses the challenges and potential solutions, for providing exercise-based therapeutic options for people living with CKD; including predialysis self-management interventions, options for both prehabilitation and posttransplant rehabilitation, pragmatic considerations for delivery of exercise therapy for people receiving haemodialysis treatment and the role of virtual kidney-specific rehabilitation.Summary: Whilst there remains a need for further research in this area of patient care, there is now a body of evidence and kidney-specific guidelines that firmly support a rollout of pragmatic and scalable exercise-based interventions for people living with CKD. We are indeed nearly there now.</p

Exercise as a therapeutic intervention in chronic kidney disease:are we nearly there yet?

Purpose of review: The opportunity to review the more recent evidence for prescribing exercise-based physical rehabilitation for people living with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is timely. There has been a recent global focus evaluating how physical activity interventions might improve health-related quality of life and outcomes for people living with chronic health conditions in a post-COVID era. There is finally a long overdue commitment from the kidney research and clinical community to deliver pragmatic interventions to help people living with CKD to be able to live well with their condition.Recent findings: This article reviews recent research, and discusses the challenges and potential solutions, for providing exercise-based therapeutic options for people living with CKD; including predialysis self-management interventions, options for both prehabilitation and posttransplant rehabilitation, pragmatic considerations for delivery of exercise therapy for people receiving haemodialysis treatment and the role of virtual kidney-specific rehabilitation.Summary: Whilst there remains a need for further research in this area of patient care, there is now a body of evidence and kidney-specific guidelines that firmly support a rollout of pragmatic and scalable exercise-based interventions for people living with CKD. We are indeed nearly there now.</p

Exercise as a therapeutic intervention in chronic kidney disease:are we nearly there yet?

Purpose of review: The opportunity to review the more recent evidence for prescribing exercise-based physical rehabilitation for people living with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is timely. There has been a recent global focus evaluating how physical activity interventions might improve health-related quality of life and outcomes for people living with chronic health conditions in a post-COVID era. There is finally a long overdue commitment from the kidney research and clinical community to deliver pragmatic interventions to help people living with CKD to be able to live well with their condition.Recent findings: This article reviews recent research, and discusses the challenges and potential solutions, for providing exercise-based therapeutic options for people living with CKD; including predialysis self-management interventions, options for both prehabilitation and posttransplant rehabilitation, pragmatic considerations for delivery of exercise therapy for people receiving haemodialysis treatment and the role of virtual kidney-specific rehabilitation.Summary: Whilst there remains a need for further research in this area of patient care, there is now a body of evidence and kidney-specific guidelines that firmly support a rollout of pragmatic and scalable exercise-based interventions for people living with CKD. We are indeed nearly there now.</p

Evaluation of hip precautions following total hip replacement: a before and after study

Purpose: To evaluate the effect of hip precautions following total hip replacement (THR) by comparing outcomes of patients who received hip precautions with those who did not. Methods: Before (phase 1) and after (phase 2) study with two consecutive cohorts of patients. In phase 1, patients were strictly educated about hip precautions. In phase 2, patients were not advised about precautions but encouraged to move as able. The primary outcome was the Oxford Hip Score (measuring pain and function) at threemonths. Secondary outcomes included Oxford Hip Score, activities of daily living (ADLs) (Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living), sleep (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index), mood (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), and quality of life (QoL) (EQ-5 D). Results: A total 237 participants successfully underwent THR surgery, 118 participants in phase 1 and 119 in phase 2. At threemonths postoperatively, participants had significantly equivalent Oxford Hip Scores (MD= −0.82, 95% CI: −2.64 to 1.00). No significant differences between the groups were observed at sixweeks and threemonths postoperatively for secondary outcomes. Conclusions: Patients recovered at a similar rate regardless of whether they received hip precautions or not, with no increase in complications observed. The findings lend evidence to support decision-making around the removal of precautions.Implications for rehabilitation The use of no hip precautions resulted in no additional benefit following primary total hip replacement surgery in terms of functional recovery. Patients who were not prescribed precautions had significantly less pain and greater function during the first week after surgery. Total hip replacement patients had similar outcomes at six weeks and threemonths postoperatively regardless of whether they received hip precautions or not. The study provides evidence to suggest that hip precautions may not be needed routinely following elective primary total hip replacement

Achieving consensus on psychosocial and physical rehabilitation management for people living with kidney disease

From Crossref journal articles via Jisc Publications RouterHistory: epub 2023-05-19, issued 2023-05-19Article version: AMPublication status: PublishedPelagia Koufaki - ORCID: 0000-0002-1406-3729 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1406-3729Background People living with chronic kidney disease (CKD) need to be able to live well with their condition. The provision of psychosocial interventions (psychological, psychiatric, and social care) and physical rehabilitation management is variable across England, as well as the rest of the United Kingdom. There is a need for clear recommendations for standards of psychosocial and physical rehabilitation care for people living with CKD, and guidance for the commissioning and measurement of these services. The NHS England Renal Services Transformation Programme (RSTP) supported a programme of work and modified Delphi process to address the management of psychosocial and physical rehabilitation care as part of a larger body of work to formulate a comprehensive commissioning toolkit for renal care services across England. We sought to achieve expert consensus regarding the psychosocial and physical rehabilitation management of people living with CKD in England and the rest of the UK. Method A Delphi consensus method was used to gather and refine expert opinions of senior members of the kidney multi-disciplinary team (MDT) and other key stakeholders in the UK. An agreement was sought on 16 statements reflecting aspects of psychosocial and physical rehabilitation management for people living with CKD. Results Twenty-six expert practitioners and other key stakeholders, including lived experience representatives, participated in the process. The consensus (&amp;gt;80% affirmative votes) amongst the respondents for all 16 statements was high. Nine recommendation statements were discussed and refined further to be included in the final iteration of the ‘Systems’ section of the NHS England RSTP commissioning toolkit. These priority recommendations reflect pragmatic solutions that can be implemented in renal care and include recommendations for a holistic well-being assessment for all people living with CKD who are approaching dialysis, or who are at listing for kidney transplantation, which includes the use of validated measurement tools to assess the need for further intervention in psychosocial and physical rehabilitation management. It is recommended that the scores from these measurement tools be included in the NHS England Renal Data Dashboard. There was also a recommendation for referral as appropriate to NHS Talking therapies, psychology, counselling or psychotherapy, social work or liaison psychiatry for those with identified psychosocial needs. The use of digital resources was recommended to be used in addition to face-to-face care to provide physical rehabilitation, and all healthcare professionals should be educated to recognise psychosocial and physical rehabilitation needs and refer/sign-post people with CKD to appropriate services. Conclusion There was high consensus amongst senior members of the kidney MDT and other key stakeholders, including those with lived experience, in the UK on all aspects of the psychosocial and physical rehabilitation management of people living with CKD. The results of this process will be used by NHS England to inform the ‘Systems’ section of the commissioning toolkit and data dashboard and to inform the National Standards of Care for people living with CKD.inpressinpres

The Impact of Falls: A Qualitative Study of the Experiences of People Receiving Haemodialysis

The prevalence of falls is high in people receiving haemodialysis (HD). This study aimed to explore the experiences of people receiving HD who had fallen in the last six months. A qualitative study, informed by constructivist grounded theory, used semi-structured interviews in combination with falls diaries. Twenty-five adults (mean age of 69 ± 10 years, 13 female, 13 White British) receiving HD with a history of at least one fall in the last six months (median 3, IQR 2−4) participated. Data were organised within three themes: (a) participants’ perceptions of the cause of their fall(s): poor balance, weakness, and dizziness, exacerbated by environmental causes, (b) the consequences of the fall: injuries were disproportionate to the severity of the fall leading to loss of confidence, function and disruptions to HD, (c) reporting and coping with falls: most did not receive any specific care regarding falls. Those who attended falls services reported access barriers. In response, personal coping strategies included avoidance, vigilance, and resignation. These findings indicate that a greater focus on proactively identifying falls, comprehensive assessment, and timely access to appropriate falls prevention programmes is required to improve care and outcomes

The Codevelopment of “My Kidneys & Me”: A Digital Self-management Program for People With Chronic Kidney Disease

Background: Health care self-management is important for people living with nondialysis chronic kidney disease (CKD). However, the few available resources are of variable quality. Objective: This work describes the systematic codevelopment of “My Kidneys & Me” (MK&M), a theory-driven and evidence-based digital self-management resource for people with nondialysis CKD, guided by an established process used for the successful development of the diabetes education program MyDESMOND (Diabetes Education and Self-Management for Ongoing and Newly Diagnosed, DESMOND). Methods: A multidisciplinary steering group comprising kidney health care professionals and researchers and specialists in the development of complex interventions and digital health provided expertise in the clinical and psychosocial aspects of CKD, self-management, digital health, and behavior change. A patient and public involvement group helped identify the needs and priorities of MK&M and co-design the resource. MK&M was developed in 2 sequential phases. Phase 1 involved the codevelopment process of the MK&M resource (content and materials), using Intervention Mapping (IM) as a framework. The first 4 IM steps guided the development process: needs assessment was conducted to describe the context of the intervention; intervention outcomes, performance objectives, and behavioral determinants were identified; theory- and evidence-based change methods and practical strategies to deliver change methods were selected; and program components were developed and refined. Phase 2 involved the adoption and adaptation of the existing MyDESMOND digital platform to suit the MK&M resource. Results: The needs assessment identified that individuals with CKD have multiple differing needs and that delivering a self-management program digitally would enable accessible, tailored, and interactive information and support. The intended outcomes of MK&M were to improve and maintain effective self-management behaviors, including physical activity and lifestyle, improve knowledge, promote self-care skills, increase self-efficacy, and enhance well-being. This was achieved through the provision of content and materials designed to increase CKD knowledge and patient activation, reduce health risks, manage symptoms, and improve physical function. Theories and behavior change techniques selected include Self-Management Framework, Capability, Opportunity, Motivation Behavior model components of Behaviour Change Wheel and taxonomy of behavior change techniques, Health Action Process Approach Model, Common Sense Model, and Social Cognitive Theory. The program components developed comprised educational and behavior change sessions, health trackers (eg, monitoring blood pressure, symptoms, and exercise), goal-setting features, and forums for social support. The MyDESMOND digital platform represented an ideal existing platform to host MK&M; thus, the MyDESMOND interface and features were adopted and adapted for MK&M. Conclusions: Applying the IM framework enabled the systematic application of theory, empirical evidence, and practical perspectives in the codevelopment of MK&M content and materials. Adopting and adapting a preexisting platform provided a cost- and time-efficient approach for developing our digital intervention. In the next stage of work, the efficacy of MK&M in increasing patient activation will be tested in a randomized controlled trial

Global Policy Barriers and Enablers to Exercise and Physical Activity in Kidney Care

Objective: Impairment in physical function and physical performance leads to decreased independence and health-related quality of life in people living with chronic kidney disease and end-stage kidney disease. Physical activity and exercise in kidney care are not priorities in policy development. We aimed to identify global policy-related enablers, barriers, and strategies to increase exercise participation and physical activity behavior for people living with kidney disease. Design and Methods: Guided by the Behavior Change Wheel theoretical framework, 50 global renal exercise experts developed policy barriers and enablers to exercise program implementation and physical activity promotion in kidney care. The consensus process consisted of developing themes from renal experts from North America, South America, Continental Europe, United Kingdom, Asia, and Oceania. Strategies to address enablers and barriers were identified by the group, and consensus was achieved. Results: We found that policies addressing funding, service provision, legislation, regulations, guidelines, the environment, communication, and marketing are required to support people with kidney disease to be physically active, participate in exercise, and improve health-related quality of life. We provide a global perspective and highlight Japanese, Canadian, and other regional examples where policies have been developed to increase renal physical activity and rehabilitation. We present recommendations targeting multiple stakeholders including nephrologists, nurses, allied health clinicians, organizations providing renal care and education, and renal program funders. Conclusions: We strongly recommend the nephrology community and people living with kidney disease take action to change policy now, rather than idly waiting for indisputable clinical trial evidence that increasing physical activity, strength, fitness, and function improves the lives of people living with kidney disease