Three measures of physical rehabilitation effectiveness in elderly patients: a prospective, longitudinal, comparative analysis

Table 2 Relative Functional Gain (RFG), Absolute Functional Gain (AFG) and Rehabilitation Efficiency index (REI) (n = 685)

Group	Number of patients N (%)	Relative Functional Gain (RFG)	Absolute Functional Gain (AFG)^a,c	Rehabilitation Efficiency index (REI)^a,c
Group I	117 (17.2 %)	0 (negative, indeterminate^b)	−9.8 (±19.1)	−1.4 (±3.7)
Group II	68 (9.9 %)	1–34 % (low-moderate)	11.2 (±6.2)	0.8 (±0.6)
Group III	311 (45.4 %)	35–99 % (elevated)	35.2 (±15.0)	2.7 (±1.7)
Group IV	189 (27.5 %)	100 % (complete recovery)	34.5 (±15.8)	3.3 (±2.2)

^aValues expressed as mean ± standard deviation (REI ≥1 indicates high efficiency of the rehabilitation process)
^bFor purposes of analysis, negative or indeterminate values resulting from calculations were converted to 0. (Patients who died, lost functional capacity during their stay in the unit or were transferred to acute care hospitals for an acute event or worsening clinical status are included in this group)
^cThere were significant differences in mean values between all the groups (p < 0.001), except for the AFG between groups III and IV (p = 0.593)

ISSN: 1471-2318