NCT00012714

Brief Summary

Prior rehabilitation outcome studies had many weaknesses. They had: a) evaluated rehabilitation effects only in isolated subgroups, b) focused on functional ability rather than on quality of life, c) not used randomized control groups, and d) had inadequate sample sizes. Differences in methodological approaches have resulted in inconsistent findings. The lack of long-term benefits suggests that services may need to be continued at home or in subacute care settings to optimize their effectiveness. Unfortunately, prior research did not include behavioral outcomes. The potential benefits of rehabilitative care could thus not be evaluated by these studies in more meaningful detail, and they did not accurately reflect the psychosocial objectives of rehabilitation.

Trial Health

80
On Track

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Enrollment
180

participants targeted

Target at P75+ for phase_2

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
completed

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

June 1, 2000

Completed
10 months until next milestone

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

March 14, 2001

Completed
2 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

March 16, 2001

Completed
Last Updated

April 7, 2015

Status Verified

February 1, 2007

First QC Date

March 14, 2001

Last Update Submit

April 6, 2015

Conditions

Rehabilitative Services

Study Arms (1)

Arm 1

OTHER
Behavioral: Case management services

Interventions

Case management servicesBEHAVIORAL
Arm 1

Eligibility Criteria

Age55 Years+
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersNo
Age GroupsAdult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

  • Presence of physical limitation and need for rehabilitative care as indicated by a score \>1 (not independent) on the Nursing Ward Classification index; availability of a family member selected by the patient; Major Diagnostic Code (MDC) 1, 5, 8, or 21 (comprising 87% of cases)

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (1)

VA Puget Sound Health Care System Seattle Division, Seattle, WA

Seattle, Washington, 98108, United States

Location

Related Publications (2)

  • Evans RL, Connis RT, Haselkorn JK. Hospital-based rehabilitative care versus outpatient services: effect on functioning and health status. Disabil Rehabil. 1998 Aug;20(8):298-307. doi: 10.3109/09638289809166085.

    PMID: 9651688RESULT

  • Evans RL. Perceived functional health of disabled elderly persons in a follow-up program for primary care. Psychol Rep. 1999 Apr;84(2):553-7. doi: 10.2466/pr0.1999.84.2.553.

    PMID: 10335067RESULT

Study Officials

  • Ronald L. Evans, MSW

    VA Puget Sound Health Care System Seattle Division, Seattle, WA

    PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
phase 2
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Masking
NONE
Purpose
TREATMENT
Intervention Model
SINGLE GROUP
Sponsor Type
FED
Responsible Party
SPONSOR

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

March 14, 2001

First Posted

March 16, 2001

Study Completion

June 1, 2000

Last Updated

April 7, 2015

Record last verified: 2007-02

Locations

US(1)