Clinical review

Recent advances in rehabilitation

Derick T Wade, consultant and professor in neurological disability ^a,  Bareld A de Jong, consultant in rehabilitation medicine ^b. 

^a Rivermead Rehabilitation Centre, Oxford OX1 4XD, ^b Academic Medical Centre, Meibergdreef 9, 1100 DD Amsterdam, Netherlands

Correspondence to: D T Wade derick.wade{at}dial.pipex.com

In Western countries 13-14% of the population have some degree of disability.¹ The demand for rehabilitation services will increase as evidence accrues for their effectiveness and as more people survive longer with substantial disability. Current evidence strongly supports the provision of well organised, coordinated, multidisciplinary rehabilitation services based on a problem oriented approach.² In future, specific interventions will be more evidence based, leading to more appropriate use of interventions and more appropriate referrals to specialist services.

Rehabilitation has recently seen many practical innovations and new evidence for specific interventions, but the major advances in rehabilitation are conceptual rather than practical. Firstly, the approach to patients has moved from a predominantly medical one to one in which psychological and sociocultural aspects are equally important. Secondly, the need for organised specialist rehabilitation servicesfor example, for neurological disabilitiesis being recognised.

	Methods

Top Methods Nature and context of... Research and measurement Evidence for rehabilitation Pharmacological treatment Therapy Conclusion References

This review concentrates on the conceptual basis of rehabilitation and some emerging principles; the scope of rehabilitation is too large to cover all major advances. We chose topics and papers on the basis of our experience.

	Nature and context of rehabilitation

Top Methods Nature and context of... Research and measurement Evidence for rehabilitation Pharmacological treatment Therapy Conclusion References

Models of illness are important. ^{3 4} They form the basis for all decisions on the allocation of resources. They can help in the analysis and understanding of clinical cases and can form a framework for the research and planning of intervention, the construction of services, and the design of research. For effective disability services, doctors, healthcare professionals, politicians, and the general public need to understand the models.

The international classification of impairments, disabilities, and handicaps (ICIDH) was developed under the auspices of the World Health Organization and was first published in 1980.⁵ The development of this classification model and its worldwide acceptance is arguably the greatest single advance in the field of rehabilitation. There are many other models of disability and illness, ^{3 4 6} but most are similar to the ICIDH model.

The ICIDH has recently been revised.⁷ In the new version the emphasis on the personal, social, and physical context has been expanded. Some of the major terms have been changed to reflect the need for more neutral, less medically biased terminology: "disability" has become "activity," and "handicap" has become "participation." The outline of the revised model is shown in table 1; the basic model is described in more detail elsewhere. ^{6 8 9}

The acceptance of this model has fostered more consistent communication among professionals from different disciplines. The model is useful for understanding and analysing patients' problems, and it encourages a more systematic analysis of rehabilitation interventions. It also brings structure and order to research. Most importantly, it has facilitated the change of emphasis within rehabilitation from a mechanistic, medically driven process of "physical medicine" to a comprehensive, more socially driven form of rehabilitation. Finally, it has helped workers in rehabilitation to argue more coherently for an equitable share of health resources.

The model has some weaknesses, especially a failure to consider explicitly quality of life and to allow for patients' subjective experiences. The model makes explicit, however, that quality of life is probably on a separate axis or forms a separate domain.⁶

The use of the ICIDH model has also fostered discussion of the nature of rehabilitation. Although a definition of rehabilitation has still not been universally agreed, it is now recognised that definitions may refer to structure (the operational characteristics of a rehabilitation service), process (how rehabilitation services work), and outcome (the aims of rehabilitation services) (box). The core skills associated with rehabilitation are probably goal setting¹⁰ and teamwork.

Many people, in particular those with a disability, are concerned about the "medicalisation" of disability.¹¹ One important consequence of adopting the revised model is that these concerns are acknowledged. The model emphasises the relation between disease and disability and sets the rehabilitation agenda clearly in a social context while still recognising that disease has an important influence on patients' levels of physical activity and social participation and on the process of rehabilitation.

The model shows that services and agencies must work together for rehabilitation to be effective. It also extends the boundaries of rehabilitationfrom the few conditions where recovery is expected to any condition in which someone experiences disability or handicap secondary to (or as part of) illness. For example, people with multiple sclerosis, motor neurone disease, or rheumatoid arthritis are all potential clients of rehabilitation services.

	Research and measurement

Top Methods Nature and context of... Research and measurement Evidence for rehabilitation Pharmacological treatment Therapy Conclusion References

A second important advance in disability medicine has been the growth in high quality research. The national clinical guidelines on stroke cite 80 or more randomised controlled trials focused specifically on stroke rehabilitation.¹² Associated with this growth, the number of specialist rehabilitation journals has increased, and a Cochrane collaboration review group covering rehabilitation and disability has been founded. It is now accepted, particularly by the rehabilitation community, that the field is as amenable to scientific research as any other branch of medicine.

Research focused on disability requires special measurement tools. Techniques of clinical measurement in disability have greatly improved, and the ICIDH model has started to facilitate the development of even better measures. ^{13 14} For example, the Barthel activities of daily living index¹⁵ is now widely used; mobility can be recorded by timing a 10 metre walk and using the Rivermead mobility index¹⁶; and tests such as the "short orientation-memory-concentration" test¹⁷ and the motoricity index¹⁸ can detect and quantify impairment.

Rehabilitation, however, is a complex and multidisciplinary process. It is difficult to define the specific nature of interventions and to isolate the effects of specific interventions from other factors. When outcome is measured at the participation (handicap) level, factors such as employment status, housing, and social relationships are likely to be influential. Moreover, the measurement of participation is still a problem, especially as the nature and operational definition of participation is still debated.¹⁹ Handicap scales assess participation from an outsider's perspective; the need to assess perceived handicap has been recognised and is being addressed.²⁰

	Evidence for rehabilitation

Top Methods Nature and context of... Research and measurement Evidence for rehabilitation Pharmacological treatment Therapy Conclusion References

A meta-analysis of data from trials of rehabilitation in stroke units has shown that rehabilitation services in such units are effective at reducing both mortality and morbidity, possibly without any extra resources.² Furthermore, these benefits can be achieved in routine practice,²¹ and they may last for many years.²² The meta-analysis was especially important because it helped to characterise the probable important ingredients of rehabilitation: coordination, expertise, and education.

Evidence in support of specialist coordinated rehabilitation services is less strong in other fields, but trials have shown benefits for patients with multiple sclerosis, ^{23 24} mild or moderate head injury,²⁵ and back pain.²⁶

Consequently, the presumption should now be that most patients with disability will benefit from being seen by a specialist, coordinated rehabilitation service. It is no longer tenable to depict rehabilitation as an expensive placebo service.

(Credit: LITEGAIT MODELS I AND II, LITEFAIT, ARIZONA) Gait retraining in suspended harness has been reported as an effective rehabilitation technique in some neurological conditions

The evidence for each part of the process of rehabilitation is much more difficult to identify and evaluate. The evidence in favour of assessment and goal planning has been reviewed recently, ^{10 27} and, although this evidence is not susceptible to meta-analysis and is difficult to review systematically, there is reasonable support for these aspects of the process.

Specific interventions
The evidence for specific interventions is extensive, but because it covers a huge range of treatments often not specifically tied to single diseases it is difficult to construct an analytic framework,²⁸ let alone access and review it. However, recent research, again mostly related to stroke, does support various hypotheses.

	Pharmacological treatment

Top Methods Nature and context of... Research and measurement Evidence for rehabilitation Pharmacological treatment Therapy Conclusion References

Evidence now supports some specific pharmacological treatments for impairment. Injection of botulinum toxin into muscle is a remarkably specific, safe method of denervating selected muscles for a limited time, and evidence strongly supports its use in dystonia and spasticityfor example, to help improve gait after stroke. ^{35 36} This treatment will probably become much more widely used in most disorders of muscle tone following upper motor neurone damage, whatever the underlying disease. The full potential of the botulinum toxin will probably be known within the next five years, but as its injection into spastic muscles is a simple procedure, the intervention may well eventually be used in general practice.

Other pharmacological advances are less well supported but do hold hope. Amfetamine, for example, may facilitate motor recovery in the context of active rehabilitation,³⁷ but the role of this intervention is still controversial and needs further research.

	Therapy

Top Methods Nature and context of... Research and measurement Evidence for rehabilitation Pharmacological treatment Therapy Conclusion References

In neurological rehabilitation, evidence is emerging to support a pragmatic, functional, or task oriented approach in contrast with a theory based, impairment oriented approach. ^{38 39} The first involves practising activities such as dressing, rather than trying to reverse the underlying impairment(s); gait retraining in a suspended harness after a stroke also seems to be effective.⁴⁰ Evidence from other fields emphasises the need to use a psychologically based approach in all rehabilitation, not simply in neurological rehabilitation.

	Conclusion

Top Methods Nature and context of... Research and measurement Evidence for rehabilitation Pharmacological treatment Therapy Conclusion References

Advances in rehabilitation contrast dramatically with advances in all other medical areas. The advances have occurred in service delivery; no important advances in single treatments have occurred. Consequently, it has been much more difficult for rehabilitation services to maintain or increase their share of resources in the face of expensive but effective single treatment advances in other fields.

	Footnotes

   Competing interests: DTW is editor of a specialist rehabilitation journal. Both authors depend on continuing funding of rehabilitation services for their livelihood.

	References

Top Methods Nature and context of... Research and measurement Evidence for rehabilitation Pharmacological treatment Therapy Conclusion References

1.	Badley EM, Tennant A. Epidemiology. In: Goodwill CJ, Chamberlain MA, Evans C, eds. Rehabilitation of the physically disabled adult. 2nd ed. Cheltenham: Stanley Thornes, 1997.
2.	Stroke Unit Trialists' Collaboration. Collaborative systematic review of the randomised trial of organised inpatient (stroke unit) care after stroke. BMJ 1997; 314: 1151-1159[Abstract/Free Full Text].
3.	Ekdawi MY, Conning AM. Guiding models and philosophies. In: Ekdawi MY, Conning AM, eds. Psychiatric rehabilitation. A practical guide. London: Chapman and Hall, 1994:16-35.
4.	Brown RI, Hughson EA. Behavioural and social rehabilitation and training. 2nd ed. London: Chapman and Hall, 1993.
5.	Wood P. International classification of impairments, disabilities and handicaps: a manual of classification relating to the consequences of disease. Geneva: World Health Organization, 1980.
6.	Post MWM, de Witte LP, Schrijvers AJP. Quality of life and the ICIDH: towards an integrated conceptual model for rehabilitation outcomes research. Clin Rehabil 1999; 13: 5-15[Abstract/Free Full Text].
7.	ICIDH-2: international classification of functioning and disability. Geneva: World Health Organization, 1999. (Beta-2 draft.) www.who.int/icidh/ (accessed 12 Apr 2000).
8.	Wade DT. Epidemiology of disabling neurological disease: how and why does disability occur? J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1996; 61: 242-249[Medline].
9.	Badley EM. An introduction to the concepts and classifications of the international classification of impairments, disabilities and handicaps. Disabil Rehabil 1993; 15: 161-178[Medline].
10.	Wade DT. Evidence relating to goal planning in rehabilitation. Clin Rehabil 1998; 12: 273-275[Free Full Text].
11.	Oliver M. Social work with disabled people. London: Macmillan, 1983.
12.	Wade DT, Intercollegiate Working Party. The national clinical guidelines on stroke. London: Royal College of Physicians, 2000.
13.	Bowling A. Measuring disease. Buckingham: Open University Press, 1995.
14.	Wade DT. Measurement in neurological rehabilitation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992.
15.	Collin C, Wade DT, Davis S, Horne V. The Barthel ADL index: a reliability study. Int Disabil Studies 1988; 10: 61-63[Medline].
16.	Forlander DA, Bohannon RW. Rivermead mobility index: a brief review of research to date. Clin Rehabil 1999; 13: 97-100[Abstract/Free Full Text].
17.	Wade DT, Vergis E. The short orientation-memory-concentration test: a study of its reliability and validity. Clin Rehabil 1999; 13: 164-170[Abstract/Free Full Text].
18.	Collin C, Wade DT. Assessing motor impairment after stroke: a pilot reliability study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1990; 53: 576-579[Abstract].
19.	Cardol M, Brandsma JW, de Groot IJM, van den Bos GAM, de Haan RJ, de Jong BA. Handicap questionnaires: what do they assess? Disabil Rehabil 1999; 21: 97-105[CrossRef][Medline].
20.	Cardol M, de Haan RJ, van den Bos GAM, de Jong B, de Groot IJM. The development of a handicap assessment questionnaire: the impact on participation and autonomy (IPA). Clin Rehabil 1999; 13: 411-419[Abstract/Free Full Text].
21.	Rudd AG, Irwin P, Rutledge Z, Lowe D, Morris R, Pearson MG. The national sentinel audit of stroke: a tool for raising standards of care. J R Coll Physicians Lond 1999; 33: 460-464[Medline].
22.	Indredavik B, Bakke F, Slordahl SA, Rokseth R, Haheim LL. Stroke unit treatment improves long-term quality of life. A randomised controlled trial. Stroke 1998; 29: 895-899[Abstract/Free Full Text].
23.	Freeman JA, Langdon DW, Hobart JC, Thompson AJ. The impact of inpatient rehabilitation on progressive multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol 1997; 42: 236-244[CrossRef][Medline].
24.	Di Fabio RP, Soderberg J, Choi T, Hansen CR, Schapiro RT. Extended outpatient rehabilitation: its influence on symptom frequency, fatigue, and functional status for persons with progressive multiple sclerosis. Arch Phys Med Rehab 1998; 79: 141-146[CrossRef][Medline].
25.	Wade DT, King NS, Wenden FJ, Crawford S, Caldwell FE. Routine follow-up after head injury: a second randomised controlled trial. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1998; 65: 177-183[Abstract/Free Full Text].
26.	Van Tulder MW, Esmail R, Bombardier C, Koes BW. Back schools for non-specific low back pain. In: Cochrane Collaboration,ed. Cochrane Library. Issue 3. Oxford: Update Software, 1999.
27.	Wade DT. Evidence relating to assessment in rehabilitation. Clin Rehabil 1998; 12: 183-186[Free Full Text].
28.	Wade DT. A framework for considering rehabilitation interventions. Clin Rehabil 1998; 12: 363-368[Free Full Text].
29.	Kwakkel G, Wagenaar RC, Twisk JWR, Lankhorst GF, Koetsier JC. Intensity of leg and arm training after primary middle-cerebral-artery stroke: a randomised trial. Lancet 1999; 354: 191-196[CrossRef][Medline].
30.	Kwakkel G, Wagenaar RC, Koelman TW, Lankhorst GJ, Koetsier JC. Effects of intensity of rehabilitation after stroke. A research synthesis. Stroke 1997; 28: 1550-1556[Abstract/Free Full Text].
31.	Mann WC, Ottenbacher KJ, Fraas L, Tomita M, Granger CV. Effectiveness of assistive technology and environmental interventions in maintaining independence and reducing home care costs for the elderly. Arch Fam Med 1999; 8: 210-217[Abstract/Free Full Text].
32.	Mant J, Carter J, Wade DT, Winner S. The impact of an information pack on patients with stroke and their carers: a randomised controlled trial. Clin Rehabil 1998; 12: 465-476[Abstract/Free Full Text].
33.	Montgomery EB, Lieberman A, Singh G, Fries JF. Patient education and health promotion can be effective in Parkinson's disease: a randomised controlled trial. PROPATH Advisory Board. Am J Med 1999; 97: 429-435.
34.	Lindroth Y, Brattstrom M, Bellman I, Ekestaf G, Olofsson Y, Strombeck B, et al. A problem-based education program for patients with rheumatoid arthritis: evaluation after three and twelve months. Arthritis Care and Res 1997; 10: 325-332.
35.	Lew MF, Adornato BT, Duane DD, Dykstra DD, Factor SA, Massey JM, et al. Botulinum toxin type B: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, safety and efficacy study in cervical dystonia. Neurology 1997; 49: 701-707[Abstract/Free Full Text].
36.	Burbaud P, Wiart L, Dubos JL, Gaujard E, Debelleix X, Joseph PA, et al. A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of botulinum toxin in the treatment of spastic foot in hemiparetic patients. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1996; 61: 265-269[Abstract].
37.	Walker-Batson D, Smith P, Curtis S, Unwin H, Greenlee R. Amphetamine paired with physical therapy accelerates motor recovery after stroke. Further evidence. Stroke 1995; 26: 2254-2259[Abstract/Free Full Text].
38.	Lin K, Wu C, Tickle-Degnen L, Coster W. Enhancing occupational performance through occupationally embedded exercise: a meta-analytic review. Occup Ther J Res 1997; 17: 25-47.
39.	Richards CL, Malouin F, Wood-Dauphinee S, Williams JI, Bouchard JP, Brunet D. Task-specific physical therapy for optimisation of gait recovery in acute stroke patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1993; 74: 612-620[CrossRef][Medline].
40.	Visintin M, Barbeau H, Korner-Bitensky N, Mayo NE. A new approach to retrain gait in stroke patients through body weight support and treadmill stimulation. Stroke 1998; 29: 1122-1128[Abstract/Free Full Text].