Effectiveness and efficiency of aquatic therapy on independence in activities of daily living and mobility in post-acute spinal cord injury: A matched case-control study.

Abstract

Aquatic therapy (AT), though potentially effective, lacks studies on clinical efficacy in patients with spinal cord injury (SCI). A recent study analyzing interviews with rehabilitation professionals on its clinical application reported that the scarce evidence of AT benefits was one of the actual barriers to its successful integration into clinical practice. We seek to provide evidence by comparing independence in activities of daily living (ADLs) and functional ambulation capacity in patients following rehabilitation which included AT and matched controls who followed rehabilitation without AT (non-AT). Functional Independence Measure (FIM), Spinal Cord Independence Measure (SCIM-III), Walking Index for Spinal Cord Injury (WISCI-II) and its minimal clinically important difference (WISCI-II/MCID) were assessed. The AT group followed the Halliwick concept. We performed nonparametric nearest-neighbor k:1 matching for age, time since injury to admission, FIM at admission, level of injury (paraplegia/tetraplegia), completeness and cause of injury (traumatic, non-traumatic). The rehabilitation program comprised four daily hours of intensive treatment from the multidisciplinary team. Both groups received the same total number of rehabilitation hours at the same specialized clinical center and were admitted to follow inpatient rehabilitation within 2months after injury. A total of 29 patients with SCI who followed AT (admitted between 2017 and 2023) were compared to historical matches selected from 551 inpatients with SCI (admitted between 2014 and 2023). For k=1, the groups showed no significant differences in gains, efficiency, or effectiveness in FIM and SCIM-III; significant differences were observed in WISCI-II gain (p=0.018) and WISCI-II efficiency (p=0.046) in favor of the AT group; the proportion of patients achieving WISCI-II/MCID was significantly higher for the AT group (75.9% vs. 48.3%) (p=0.030). These results were confirmed for k=2. The AT group performed similarly in independence for performing ADLs and significantly better in ambulation than the matched historical controls.