PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

David J Torgerson

Publications and source records attributed to David J Torgerson.

33 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
PubMed2004

Randomised trial of a brief physiotherapy intervention compared with usual physiotherapy for neck pain patients: outcomes and patients' preference.

OBJECTIVES: Firstly, to compare the effectiveness of a brief physiotherapy intervention with "usual" physiotherapy for patients with neck pain. Secondly, to evaluate the effect of patients' preferences on outcome. DESIGN: Non-inferiority randomised controlled trial eliciting preferences independently of randomisation. SETTING: Physiotherapy departments in a community setting in Yorkshire and north Lincolnshire. PARTICIPANTS: 268 patients (mean age 48 years) with subacute and chronic neck pain, who were referred by their general practitioner and randomly assigned to a brief physiotherapy intervention (one to three sessions) using cognitive behaviour principles to encourage self management and return to normal function or usual physiotherapy, at the discretion of the physiotherapist concerned. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The Northwick Park neck pain questionnaire (NPQ), a specific measure of functional disability resulting from neck pain. Also, the short form 36 (SF-36) questionnaire, a generic, health related, quality of life measure; and the Tampa scale for kinesophobia, a measure of fear and avoidance of movement. RESULTS: At 12 months, patients allocated to usual physiotherapy had a small but significant improvement in NPQ scores compared with patients in the brief intervention group (mean difference 1.99, 95% confidence interval 0.45 to 3.52; P = 0.01). Although the result shows a significant inferiority of the intervention, the confidence interval shows that the effect could be in the non-inferiority range for the brief intervention (below 1.2 points of NPQ score). Patients who preferred the brief intervention and received this treatment had similar outcomes to patients receiving usual physiotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Usual physiotherapy may be only marginally better than a brief physiotherapy intervention for neck pain. Patients with a preference for the brief intervention may do at least as well with this approach. Additional training for the physiotherapists in cognitive behaviour techniques might improve this approach further.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2004

Randomized controlled trial of hip protectors among women living in the community.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether hip protectors used among women living in the community in the United Kingdom and at high risk of hip fracture, lead to a reduction in hip fracture. DESIGN: Pragmatic randomized controlled trial (RCT). SETTING: Primary care with participants being recruited largely from general practitioners' patient lists. PARTICIPANTS: Women aged 70 years and over with one or more risk factors for hip fracture (i.e., low body weight, current smoker, a prior fracture, family history of hip fracture). INTERVENTION: Three pairs of hip protectors of the "shell" type mailed to participants with instructions on how to use them. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Reduction in hip fractures. RESULTS: 1,388 and 2,781 women aged 70 years or over were randomized to be given three pairs of hip protectors or act as controls, respectively. We followed up both groups of women for a minimum of 24 months (maximum 42 months, median 28). Compliance was poor with only 31% of participants reporting that they wore the hip protectors on a daily basis at 12 months. Intention-to-treat analysis showed that there was no statistically significant difference in the unadjusted odds ratios (ORs) of sustaining a hip fracture between the groups (OR = 1.19; 95% confidence interval, 0.80 to 1.78, p = 0.40). Adjustment for important covariates did not materially change these findings (OR = 1.17; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.75). Comparing the rate of hip fracture between those women who regularly wore the devices and the control group yielded an OR of 1.12 (95% CI, 0.58 to 2.03; p = 0.83). CONCLUSION: This study is the largest RCT of hip protectors to date and provides no evidence of an effect of hip protectors among women living independently and at high risk of fracture.

Accidental Falls↗
PubMed2004

Health care costs of women with symptomatic vertebral fractures.

BACKGROUND: An important aspect of the economics of fracture prevention is averted fracture costs. However, while vertebral fractures represent a significant burden to society, quantifying their cost is difficult for several reasons. In this paper, we examine the health care costs of symptomatic vertebral fractures occurring in women aged 50 years and above in the UK. METHODS: We used a variety of data sources. The prevalence of pharmaceutical treatment for fracture prevention and number of general practitioner consultations, referrals, and hospital admissions associated with a diagnosis of vertebral fracture were identified from a case control study. For the unit cost of a general practitioner consultation, referral, and cost per inpatient day, we used 2002 data produced by the Personal Social Services Research Unit. Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) for 2001-2002 were used to estimate the median length of stay in hospital for women aged 50 years and above, and the Monthly Index of Medical Specialities (MIMS) was used to identify the costs of pharmaceutical treatments. Costs were discounted at 6%. RESULTS: From these data, we estimated that for the year prior and post diagnosis the average additional health care costs for those diagnosed with vertebral fracture were pounds 165, pounds 134, and pounds 2314 for general practitioner consultations, referrals, and hospital admissions, respectively (i.e., pounds 2613). The cost of pharmaceutical treatments prescribed for fracture prevention in the year following diagnosis was pound 97. DISCUSSION: Vertebral fractures are associated with significantly increased health care costs. These costs need to be set against the costs of fracture prevention.

Aged↗
PubMed2004

Setting priorities for research.

Setting priorities for research should be conducted in order to make the most efficient use of scarce resources. Yet the uptake in practice of such methods by researchers and commissioners of research alike has been slow, in part because the methodologies available to do so have not been widely disseminated. This paper argues that an appropriate priority-setting methodology should meet the objectives of the health system, that is to provide the most health benefits to the population that it serves within the budget constraint and while respecting equity considerations. A condition for these criteria to be met is to construct and operationalise an appropriate definition of the value of research. Five different ways that have been used in practice to value research and set priorities were reviewed. Shortcomings in the ways research is valued make it unlikely that the application of subjective methods, burden of disease methods, and clinical variations and payback methods meet the objectives of the health system. Using the fifth method, value of information, priority-setting can meet the objectives of the health system because it expresses the value of research using the same overall cost-effectiveness framework that is employed for decisions on service provision. However, this method still requires further work to evaluate how research outcomes can then be communicated to clinical practitioners and how practitioners can be encouraged to implement them.

Cost of Illness↗
PubMed2003

Randomised controlled trial of hip protectors for the prevention of second hip fractures.

OBJECTIVE: to assess whether the use of Safehip hip protectors would prevent second hip fractures among men and women living in the community. DESIGN: pragmatic randomised controlled trial. SETTING: people living in the community. PARTICIPANTS: men and women aged 70 years and over who had sustained one hip fracture and who were living in the community. RESULTS: 366 men and women who were either living outside residential care or were about to be discharged back home were randomised to receive three pairs of hip protectors or to act as controls. Approximately 34% of participants allocated to receive hip protectors wore them every day. After a median follow up of 14 months 8 participants had a second hip fracture with 6 in the intervention and 2 in the control group (Odds Ratio for second hip fracture=3.10, 95% confidence interval 0.62-15.58). Hip protectors had no effect on risk of other fractures or on falls. CONCLUSION: this trial does not suggest a benefit of the studied hip protector among people living outside residential accommodation.

Accidental Falls↗
PubMed2002

Resource use data by patient report or hospital records: do they agree?

BACKGROUND: Economic evaluations alongside clinical trials are becoming increasingly common. Cost data are often collected through the use of postal questionnaires; however, the accuracy of this method is uncertain. We compared postal questionnaires with hospital records for collecting data on physiotherapy service use. METHODS: As part of a randomised trial of orthopaedic medicine compared with orthopaedic surgery we collected physiotherapy use data on a group of patients from retrospective postal questionnaires and from hospital records. RESULTS: 315 patients were referred for physiotherapy. Hospital data on attendances was available for 30% (n = 96), compared with 48% (n = 150) of patients completing questionnaire data (95% Cl for difference = 10% to 24%); 19% (n = 59) had data available from both sources. The two methods produced an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.54 (95% Cl 0.31 to 0.70). However, the two methods produced significantly different estimates of resource use with patient self report recalling a mean of 1.3 extra visits (95% Cl 0.4 to 2.2) compared with hospital records. CONCLUSIONS: Using questionnaires in this study produced data on a greater number of patients compared with examination of hospital records. However, the two data sources did differ in the quantity of physiotherapy used and this should be taken into account in any analysis.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

The need for randomized controlled trials in podiatric medical research.

The randomized controlled trial is the most robust method available to evaluate health-care treatments. If podiatric medical practice is to be based on rigorous evidence, then high-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to inform that practice. In this article, we examine the extent to which randomized controlled trials are used in recent podiatric medical research and appraise the quality of those that are available. Using the Cochrane database of all randomized controlled trials in health care, we found only six relevant trials undertaken in podiatric medicine since 1997. These studies were of variable quality. We also discuss the key features of a rigorous trial design. To date, the clinical practice of podiatric medicine is not adequately informed by the best available evidence. We call for more high-quality randomized controlled trials to be undertaken in podiatric medical research.

Adult↗