Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23692389›Full record

ArticleDisability and rehabilitation2014

Developing stroke-specific vocational rehabilitation: a soft systems analysis of current service provision.

Emma Sinclair, Kathryn Radford, Mary Grant, Jane Terry

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Disability and rehabilitation, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 68 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. How primary care can help survivors of transient ischaemic attack and stroke return to work: focus groups with stakeholders from a UK community.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2020
    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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Emma SinclairDivision of Rehabilitation and Ageing , University of Nottingham , UK and.
Kathryn Radford
Mary Grant
Jane Terry
University of Nottingham · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study aimed to clarify the existing service provision of stroke-specific vocational rehabilitation (VR) in one English county, in order to facilitate future service development.

methodUsing soft systems methodology, services in Health, Social Care, Department of Work and Pensions, the voluntary and private sectors, which were identified as supporting return to work after stroke, were mapped using a mixed-methodology approach.

resultsA lack of a sanctioned VR pathway meant access to support relied on brokered provision and tacit knowledge. The timing of an intervention was complex and there was a substantial degree of unmet need for mild stroke patients. VR was seen as "non-essential" due to competing commissioning priorities. Service providers from all sectors lacked training and cross-sector partnerships were tenuous and provider roles unclear.

conclusionsStroke-specific VR should be delivered by an integrated, cross-sector multi-disciplinary team and integrated commissioning between health and other sectors is necessary. Although early intervention is important, support later on in the recovery process is also necessary. Service providers need adequate training to meet the needs of stroke survivors wishing to return to work and better awareness of best practice guidelines. Business cases which demonstrate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of VR are vital. Implications for Rehabilitation The timeliness of a vocational rehabilitation (VR) intervention is complex; services need to be responsive to the changing needs of the stroke survivor throughout their recovery process and have better mechanisms to ensure re-entry into the stroke pathway is possible. Return to work is a recognised health outcome; health services need to develop better mechanisms for interagency/cross sector working and liaison with employers and not assume that VR is beyond their remit. Therapists and non-health service providers should receive sufficient training to meet the needs of stroke survivors wishing to return to work. Rehabilitation teams must decide how to implement national guidance within existing resources and what training is needed to deploy SSVR. The lack of a sanctioned pathway results in disorganised and patchy provision of VR for stroke survivors; mild stroke patients can fall through the net and receive little or no support. The journey back to work commences at the point of stroke. Mechanisms for identifying acute stroke survivors who were working at onset and for assessing the impact of the stroke on their work need to be put in place. The entire MDT has a role to play. In the absence of a VR specialist, even patients without obvious disability should be referred for ongoing rehabilitation with detailed work assessment and signposted to employment specialists e.g. disability employment advisors EARLY after stroke. Health-based VR interventions can influence work return and job retention. However, therapists must routinely measure work outcomes to inform their business case and be encouraged to demonstrate these outcomes to local commissioners. Commissioners should consider emerging evidence of early VR interventions on reduced length of stay, health and social care resource use and the wider health benefits of maintaining employment.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareRehabilitation, VocationalStrokeContinuity of Patient CareEarly Medical InterventionEmployment, SupportedEnglandHealth Care SurveysHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHealth PersonnelHumansNeeds AssessmentPersons with DisabilitiesSeverity of Illness IndexSocial SupportStroke Rehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID23692389
PMCPMC3971737
OpenAlexW1982431788

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.