S149 S290
Poster 25:
Is the Fear Avoidance Model Related with Aerobic
Capacity, Self-perceived Functional Abilities and
Body Mass Index in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis?
Daniel Pacheco Covarrubias, MD (Hospital Civil de Guadalajara,
Zapopan, Jalisco, Mexico), Tonatiuh Avila Garcia, MD,
Ana C. Gutierrez, MD, Ana Villagrana, MD, Francisco Ponce, MD
Disclosures:
Daniel Pacheco Covarrubias: I Have No Relevant Financial
Relationships To Disclose
Objective:
To evaluate the relationship between fear avoidance be-
liefs, aerobic capacity, self-perceived functional abilities and body
mass index (BMI) in patients with primary knee osteoarthritis.
Design:
Cross-sectional study.
Setting:
Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation at a
public tertiary hospital.
Participants:
Sixteen subjects (87.5% female and 12.5% male), aged
49-83 years, with previous diagnosis of primary knee osteoarthritis.
Use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs during the week of
evaluation, total or partial knee arthroplasty, osteotomy and other
ligament injuries were exclusion criteria.
Interventions:
Not applicable.
Main Outcome Measures:
Fear avoidance beliefs, aerobic capacity
and self-perceived functional abilities were measured with Tampa
Scale of Kinesiophobia 11-items (TSK-11), Six Minute Walk Test (6MWT)
and The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index
(WOMAC) respectively, BMI were also measured. Coefficient of Pearson
was used to analyze the relationship between all measures obtained.
Results:
Correlation between WOMAC sum score and TSK-11 score was
positive, strong (r
¼
0.656) and statistically significant (p
<
.01). We also
identified negative and weak correlations between TSK-11 score and
distance walked during 6MWT (r
¼
-0.226) and TSK-11 score and BMI
(r
¼
-0.335) in these cases were no statistical significance (p
>
.05).
Conclusions:
Kinesiophobia is related with worse self-perceived
abilities in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Relation of kinesi-
ophobia, aerobic capacity and body composition is not relevant in this
sample, complementary studies are required to determine the impact
of kinesiophobia in knee osteoarthritis.
Level of Evidence:
Level III
Poster 26:
Early Rehabilitation After Kidney Transplantation
Tonatiuh Avila Garcia, MD (Hospital Civil de Guadalajara,
Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico), Ana C. Gutierrez, MD,
Daniel Pacheco Covarrubias, MD, Ana Villagrana, MD,
Concepcion Oseguera, MD
Disclosures:
Tonatiuh Avila Garcia: I Have No Relevant Financial Re-
lationships To Disclose
Objective:
To evaluate the effects of an early rehabilitation program
in renal transplant patients.
Design:
Quasi-experimental study.
Setting:
Departments of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation and
Transplants at a public tertiary hospital.
Participants:
15 kidney transplanted subjects aged 18-60 years with
preserved functional ability to walk; severe cardiopulmonary diseases,
lower limb amputation and blindness were exclusion criteria.
Interventions:
All patients performed a home-based rehabilitation
program composed by joint mobilization, muscular stretching, pro-
gressive strengthening and cycle ergometer training; the protocol
started three days after transplant and lasted two months, its fre-
quency was five supervised sessions per week.
Main Outcome Measures:
Health-related quality of life, aerobic ca-
pacity and lower limb functional strength were measured before
transplant and two months post surgery with Kidney Disease Quality of
Life 36 (KDQoL-36) questionnaire, Six-Minute Walk Test (6MWT) and
Thirty Seconds Sit to Stand Test (30sSTS) respectively; we analyzed the
differences between scores using t test.
Results:
KDQoL-36 score improved from 75.20 12.75 to
89.73 7.90; this difference had statistical significance (p
<
.01). The
number of stands with 30sSTS increased from 14.86 2.82 to
17.6 4.83; this gain also was statistically significant (p
<
.01). Dis-
tance walked during 6MWT decreased from 540.90 66.89 to
506.93 70.37 meters; in this case the p value was .06. No adverse
effects were reported.
Conclusions:
This early rehabilitation program was related with an
improvement on health related quality of life and lower limb func-
tional strength in renal transplanted patients. Aerobic capacity dete-
riorated in spite of physical therapy. Complementary studies with a
control group and longer follow-up are needed.
Level of Evidence:
Level II
Poster 28:
A Survey Regarding the Knowledge, Attitudes, and
Beliefs of Graduates of Cancer Rehabilitation
Fellowship Programs
Rajesh Yadav, MD, FAAPMR (UTMD Anderson Cancer Ctr, Houston, TX,
United States), An Ngo-Huang, DO, FAAPMR, Christian M. Custodio,
MD, Eduardo Bruera, MD
Disclosures:
Rajesh Yadav: I Have No Relevant Financial Relationships
To Disclose
Objective:
To survey cancer rehabilitation fellowship graduates
regarding their experience of cancer rehabilitation fellowship
programs.
Design:
All cancer rehabilitation fellowship program graduates who
completed program by July 2015 from University of Texas MD Anderson
Cancer Center and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center.
Setting:
Comprehensive Cancer Center.
Participants:
18 cancer rehabilitation fellowship program graduates.
Interventions:
Survey.
Main Outcome Measures:
Usefulness of training program preparing
for taking care of rehabilitation needs in cancer patients and infor-
mation about current practice.
Results:
Sixteen (89%) of fellowship graduates responded. All of the
respondents agreed that such a program helped them prepare for
meeting rehabilitation needs of cancer patients. Seven (44%) of
respondents thought of this subspecialty before becoming a 3rd
year resident and same number did so during their 3rd year of
Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation residency. Ten (63%) had
exposure to cancer rehabilitation subspecialty during residency.
Such exposure was in inpatient setting for all. Nine respondents
(56%) had personal or family encounter with cancer. 5/10 (50%)
mentioned that a position was created specifically for them as a
cancer rehabilitation physician after an interview. 11/15 (73%)
mentioned that they were the sole cancer rehabilitation physician
in their practice and 7/15 (47%) had more than half of their practice
devoted to such patients. Graduates reported a mean of 58% of
their clinical time in the outpatient setting. 9/14 (64%) estimated
annual growth rate of 6% in number of patients being referred for
cancer rehabilitation. 12/15 (80%) were involved in cancer reha-
bilitation education to a variety of trainees. Development of cancer
rehabilitation program was a key issue identified as an unmet need
in current training programs.
Conclusions:
Graduates of cancer rehabilitation fellowship programs
strongly value their training to meet the rehabilitation needs of this
challenging group of patients. Majority of the graduates were able to
continue their career into jobs that were primarily cancer rehabilita-
tion related.
Level of Evidence:
Level IV
S149
Abstracts / PM R 9 (2017) S131-S290