Multidisciplinary rehabilitation versus medical care: a meta-analysis

Research studies in physical medicine have not demonstrated the effectiveness of inpatient rehabilitation services, primarily due to differences in methodological approaches which have led to inconsistent findings. Because of differing inclusion and outcome criteria, even meta-analyses have been inconclusive. To address this problem, research literature comparing the clinical effectiveness of rehabilitation programs with medical care was evaluated for three uniformly available outcome criteria: survival; functional ability; and discharge location. Published trials were obtained from citations in Index Medicus (Medicine) and Nursing and Allied Health Abstracts covering the recent 20 year period from 1974 to 1994. We used meta-analyses to test the hypotheses that specialized rehabilitative care (vs conventional medical care) improves health outcomes. Results of our meta-analyses indicated that rehabilitation services were significantly associated with better rates of survival and improved function during hospital stay (P < 0.01), but significance was not observed at follow-up. Also, rehabilitation patients returned to their homes and remained there more frequently than controls (P < 0.001). We concluded that patients who participate in inpatient rehabilitation programs function better at hospital discharge, have a better chance of short term survival, and return home more frequently than non-participants. However, long term survival and function were the same for experimental and control subjects. The sustaining benefit of returning home may suffice to justify the provision of inpatient rehabilitation. However, the lack of other long term benefits suggests that services may need to be continued at home or in subacute care settings to optimize their effectiveness.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)