Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 51-10 | Page 52

772
D. L. Snell et al.
Study variables
Demographic variables included age, sex, ethnicity, highest
education level, work status, funder of surgery (public, private).
Clinical and surgical variables included pre-existing medical
conditions/comorbidities (self-reported and ASA classification);
body mass index, procedure type (THR, TKR, UKR), and time
on the surgical waiting list (weeks). Rehabilitation variables in-
cluded time from surgery to first rehabilitation session (weeks);
pre- and post-operative rehabilitation type (physiotherapy,
occupational therapy, other), setting (home-based programme,
outpatient clinic-based rehabilitation, other), frequency/in-
tensity (times per week, number of weeks/mean duration of
sessions); and number of outpatient follow-up reviews with
the surgeon. Six-month self-reported post-operative outcomes
were collected as follows: pain and function outcomes with
the Oxford Hip and Knee Scores (11, 12); quality of life with
World Health Organization Quality of Life 8-item questionnaire
(WHOQOL-8 (14, 15)).
there were any differences in response rate on the
basis of funding source. A small number of recruited
participants reported that they received funding from
ACC (n = 56) or self-funded their surgery (n = 28) and
were not included in analyses. Thus, of the full recrui-
ted cohort, n = 522 represented the sample included in
analyses for the current study.
Description of study sample
A summary of participant demographic and clinical
characteristics is provided in Table I. The mean age
of participants was 67.8 years (SD 8.7, range 44–89
Table I. Demographic and clinical characteristics of the study
sample on the basis of funding type (n = 522)
Funding source
Data analyses
First, the sample was characterized by funding source in terms
of demographic status, health status (e.g. presence of comorbi-
dities, body mass index), procedure type, geographical location,
participation in any pre- and/or post-operative rehabilitation
and outcomes using descriptive statistics. Secondly, for those
who obtained rehabilitation services before and/or after their
operation, the setting (e.g. home-based programme, outpatient
clinic, other), time from surgery to first rehabilitation session, the
duration, intensity (times per week/total hours), and how reha-
bilitation services and practice patterns varied based on funding
source and geography were identified. Bivariate analyses then
tested relationships between funding source, demographic, clini-
cal and rehabilitation variables. Contingency tables (cross-tabs)
were calculated for discrete variables and χ 2 tests determined
significance of 2-way associations. For continuous variables,
independent-samples t-tests, or analysis of variance were used.
Results are reported as odds ratios or mean differences, and 95%
confidence intervals (95% CI).
List-wise deletion, the default SPSS approach to account for
missing data, was used. This was considered appropriate due
to sample size and the limited amount of missing data (< 3%)
across variables.
RESULTS
A total of 768 people who met the role of rehabilita-
tion study inclusion criteria agreed to contact from
the study team and returned flyers to the NZJR with
their preferred contact information. Of these, 608
were successfully recruited into the study and returned
questionnaires (79.2% response rate; n = 158 online
and n =  450 by post). Of those who agreed to initial
contact, but who were not recruited into the study, 17
subsequently declined to participate (too ill, moved
away, changed their mind) or were deceased at time
of contact (n = 1). Of the remaining patients, 54 were
contacted and agreed to participate, but did not return
their questionnaires after 3 reminders and 88 could
not be contacted. No data were available in this study
regarding non-recruited participants to determine if
www.medicaljournals.se/jrm
Private
(n = 213) Public
(n = 309)
65.2 (8.0) 69.6 (8.7)
119 (55.9) 168 (54.4)
New Zealand European 193 (90.6) 277 (89.6)
New Zealand Māori 11 (5.2) 15 (4.9)
Other 9 (4.2) 17 (5.5)
No formal qualifications 42 (19.7) 100 (32.4)
High-school 60 (28.2) 92 (29.8)
Tertiary 109 (51.2) 107 (34.6)
Other 2 (0.9) 10 (3.2)
Employed full-time 81 (38.0) 53 (17.2)
Employed part-time 41 (19.2) 48 (15.5)
Not employed/retired 82 (38.5) 197 (63.8)
Other 9 (4.2) 11 (3.6)
Rural (town or area<10,000 people) 66 (31.4) 121 (39.4)
Large town (10,000–50,000 people) 30 (14.3) 52 (16.9)
Urban/city (>50,000 people) 114 (54.3) 134 (43.6)
Total hip 68 (31.9) 121 (39.2)
Total knee 117 (54.9) 156 (50.5)
Unicompartmental knee 28 (13.1) 32 (10.4)
4.8 (9.2) 47.7 (58.3)
None 77 (41.8) 75 (26.4)
Cardiac problems 40 (21.7) 75 (26.4)
Respiratory problems 6 (3.3) 10 (3.5)
Diabetes 2 (1.1) 18 (6.3)
Depression or anxiety 7 (3.8) 14 (4.9)
Other 52 (28.3) 92 (30.8)
29.1 (5.1) 29.7 (5.5)
1 (healthy) 38 (18.4) 32 (10.6)
2 (mild systemic disease) 145 (70.0) 200 (66.4)
3 (severe systemic disease – not incapacitating) 23 (11.1) 69 (22.9)
Demographic characteristics
Age, years, mean (SD) b *
Sex, male, n (%) a
Ethnicity, n (%) a
Educational qualifications, n (%) a *
Work status at time of surgery, n (%) a *
Geographical variables, n (%) a
Clinical characteristics
Procedure type
Wait list for surgery pre-op, weeks, mean (SD) b *
a
Self-reported comorbidities, n (%) *
Body mass index, mean (SD) b *
ASA classification, n (%) a *
4 (life threatening disease – incapacitating)
6-month post-operative total Oxford score, mean
(SD) b *
1 (0.5) 0 (0.0)
40.9 (6.5) 38.9 (8.3)
6-month post-operative WHOQOL-8, mean (SD) b * 33.4 (4.3)
31.5 (5.3)
*p  < 0.05. a χ 2 tests. b independent-samples t-tests.
ASA: American Society for Anaesthesiologists classification; WHOQOL-8: World
Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule – 8 item version. Oxford
and WHOQOL scores at 6 months post-surgery.