Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22040281›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2011

Determining level of care appropriateness in the patient journey from acute care to rehabilitation.

Christopher J Poulos, Christopher Magee, Guy Bashford, Kathy Eagar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Beyond the ventilator: Rehabilitation for critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019.Australian critical care : official journal of the Confederation of Australian Critical Care Nurses · 2020
    Article
  11. An alternate level of care plan: Co-designing components of an intervention with patients, caregivers and providers to address delayed hospital discharge challenges.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Rehabilitation after lower limb injury: development of a predictive score (RALLI score).Canadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgie · 2015
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

Christopher J PoulosCentre for Health Service Development, Building 234, iC Enterprise 1, Innovation Campus, University of Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia. c.poulos@unsw.edu.au
Christopher Magee
Guy Bashford
Kathy Eagar

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe selection of patients for rehabilitation, and the timing of transfer from acute care, are important clinical decisions that impact on care quality and patient flow. This paper reports utilization review data on inpatients in acute care with stroke, hip fracture or elective joint replacement, and other inpatients referred for rehabilitation. It examines reasons why acute level of care criteria are not met and explores differences in decision making between acute care and rehabilitation teams around patient appropriateness and readiness for transfer.

methodsCohort study of patients in a large acute referral hospital in Australia followed with the InterQual utilization review tool, modified to also include reasons why utilization criteria are not met. Additional data on team decision making about appropriateness for rehabilitation, and readiness for transfer, were collected on a subset of patients.

resultsThere were 696 episodes of care (7189 bed days). Days meeting acute level of care criteria were 56% (stroke, hip fracture and joint replacement patients) and 33% (other patients, from the time of referral). Most inappropriate days in acute care were due to delays in processes/scheduling (45%) or being more appropriate for rehabilitation or lower level of care (30%).On the subset of patients, the acute care team and the utilization review tool deemed patients ready for rehabilitation transfer earlier than the rehabilitation team (means of 1.4, 1.3 and 4.0 days from the date of referral, respectively). From when deemed medically stable for transfer by the acute care team, 28% of patients became unstable. From when deemed stable by the rehabilitation team or utilization review, 9% and 11%, respectively, became unstable.

conclusionsA high proportion of patient days did not meet acute level of care criteria, due predominantly to inefficiencies in care processes, or to patients being more appropriate for an alternative level of care, including rehabilitation. The rehabilitation team was the most accurate in determining ongoing medical stability, but at the cost of a longer acute stay.To avoid inpatients remaining in acute care in a state of 'terra nullius', clinical models which provide rehabilitation within acute care, and more efficient movement to a rehabilitation setting, is required. Utilization review could have a decision support role in the determination of medical stability.

Indexed as

Stroke RehabilitationUtilization ReviewAdultAgedAged, 80 and overArthroplasty, ReplacementAustraliaCohort StudiesCritical CareFemaleHealth Services ResearchHip FracturesHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient Transfer

Identifiers

PMID22040281
PMCPMC3212985

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.