Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23435796›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2013

The Needs and Provision Complexity Scale: a multicentre prospective cohort analysis of met and unmet needs and their cost implications for patients with complex neurological disability.

Lynne Turner-Stokes, Paul McCrone, Diana M Jackson, Richard John Siegert

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Needs of Persons with Neurological Disorders.Indian journal of psychiatric social work · 2018
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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.

Lynne Turner-StokesDepartment of Palliative Care, Policy and Rehabilitation, Cicely Saunders Institute, King's College London, School of Medicine, London, UK.
Paul McCrone
Diana M Jackson
Richard John Siegert

Funding

Department of Health 08/1809/235Department of Health RP-PG-0407-10185
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo provide a brief overview of the Needs and Provision Complexity Scale (NPCS) and report its first application to describe the level of 'met' and 'unmet' health/social care needs, and to estimate their costs in community-based patients with complex neurological disability.

designA multicentre prospective cohort analysis.

settingConsecutive discharges to the community from the nine tertiary specialist inpatient neurorehabilitation units in London over 12 months (2010/2011).

participantsPatients responding at follow-up (n=211). Mean age 50.2(SD14) years, males:females 127/84. Diagnosis 157(74%) brain injury, 27(13%) spinal cord injury/peripheral neuropathy; 27(13%) other. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: The NPCS is a brief, pragmatic, directly costable instrument for measuring both an individual's needs for rehabilitation and support (NPCS-Needs) and the levels of service provided (NPCS-Gets) within a given period.

methodsThe 'NPCS-Needs' was completed by the treating clinical team at discharge. Patients and/or their carers self-reported 'NPCS-Gets' after 6 months by a postal/online questionnaire supported by a follow-up telephone interview.

resultsNeeds for medical/nursing care and accommodation were generally well met. Significant shortfalls in provision were identified in the subscales of Rehabilitation (paired t test: t -9.7, p<0.001, effect size (ES)=-0.85), Social support (t -5.8, p<0.001, ES=-0.48) and Equipment (t -5.6, p<0.001, ES=-0.44). Item-level analysis demonstrated that the frequency of Personal care received exceeded predicted needs (Wilcoxon z=-3.3, p<0.001). In 80% of cases, this care was provided/paid for by families. Translated into mean costs/patient/year, the estimated underspends on Rehabilitation (-£2320) and Social support (-£1790) were exceeded >3.5-fold by excess costs of Personal care (£10 313) and Accommodation (£4296).

conclusionsThe results identify underprovision of community-based rehabilitation and support services compared with needs, which may contribute directly to excess care burden and costs to family carers. The NPCS requires further evaluation but has potential use as a simple, directly costable tool to inform both clinical decision-making and population-based service planning and delivery.

Identifiers

PMID23435796
PMCPMC3586084

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.