Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15910689›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2005

Intermediate care: for better or worse? Process evaluation of an intermediate care model between a university hospital and a residential home.

Thomas Plochg, Diana M J Delnoij, Tineke F van der Kruk, Tonnie A C M Janmaat, Niek S Klazinga

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. The role of an intermediate unit in a clinical pathway.International journal of integrated care
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Thomas PlochgDepartment of Social Medicine, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. t.plochg@amc.uva.nl
Diana M J Delnoij
Tineke F van der Kruk
Tonnie A C M Janmaat
Niek S Klazinga

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntermediate care was developed in order to bridge acute, primary and social care, primarily for elderly persons with complex care needs. Such bridging initiatives are intended to reduce hospital stays and improve continuity of care. Although many models assume positive effects, it is often ambiguous what the benefits are and whether they can be transferred to other settings. This is due to the heterogeneity of intermediate care models and the variety of collaborating partners that set up such models. Quantitative evaluation captures only a limited series of generic structure, process and outcome parameters. More detailed information is needed to assess the dynamics of intermediate care delivery, and to find ways to improve the quality of care. Against this background, the functioning of a low intensity early discharge model of intermediate care set up in a residential home for patients released from an Amsterdam university hospital has been evaluated. The aim of this study was to produce knowledge for management to improve quality of care, and to provide more generalisable insights into the accumulated impact of such a model.

methodsA process evaluation was carried out using quantitative and qualitative methods. Registration forms and patient questionnaires were used to quantify the patient population in the model. Statistical analysis encompassed T-tests and chi-squared test to assess significance. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 21 staff members representing all disciplines working with the model. Interviews were transcribed and analysed using both 'open' and 'framework' approaches.

resultsDespite high expectations, there were significant problems. A heterogeneous patient population, a relatively unqualified staff and cultural differences between both collaborating partners impeded implementation and had an impact on the functioning of the model.

conclusionWe concluded that setting up a low intensity early discharge model of intermediate care between a university hospital and a residential home is less straightforward than was originally perceived by management, and that quality of care needs careful monitoring to ensure the change is for the better.

Indexed as

Models, OrganizationalAgedAged, 80 and overContinuity of Patient CareCooperative BehaviorFemaleForms and Records ControlHospitals, UniversityHumansInterinstitutional RelationsIntermediate Care FacilitiesInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedNetherlandsNursing Homes

Identifiers

PMID15910689
PMCPMC1168893

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.