Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25266693›Full record

ArticleSpinal cord2015

Prospective study of barriers to discharge from a spinal cord injury rehabilitation unit.

P W New

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Spinal cord, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

1 author.

P W New1] Spinal Rehabilitation Service, Caulfield Hospital, Alfred Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia [2] Epworth-Monash Rehabilitation Medicine Unit, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000000256693286

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

STUDY

designProspective open cohort case series of consecutive patients admitted with spinal cord damage to a spinal rehabilitation unit (SRU) between 1 January 2008 and 31 July 2013.

objectivesMeasure the prevalence of barriers to discharge, their reasons and resulting additional unnecessary days in hospital.

settingSRU, Victoria, Australia.

methodsConsecutive SRU admissions had prospective documentation of key clinical and demographic characteristics, the occurrence of any discharge barrier, the cause(s) and duration of unnecessary hospitalisation.

resultsThere were 235 patients in the study; 138 (58.7%) were male and the median age was 63 years. Eighty-six (36.6%) patients had a discharge barrier. The most common reasons for a discharge barrier were: waiting for approval for long-term and supported care or services, residential care, home modifications, family deliberations regarding discharge planning and the provision of equipment necessary for discharge. The reasons accounting for the greatest number of additional hospital days were: home modifications, residential care, equipment necessary for discharge, waiting for approval for long-term and supported care or services and accommodation for people unable to return to their previous residence without readily available alternatives. Over the study period 17.5% (3176/18,184) of all bed-days were occupied by patients deemed to be clinically ready for discharge from the SRU but who had a discharge barrier.

conclusionsBarriers to discharge from rehabilitation for patients with spinal cord damage are common, substantial, and represent an important opportunity for health systems improvement.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAustraliaCohort StudiesFemaleHumansLength of StayLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedOutcome Assessment, Health CarePatient DischargeRehabilitationSpinal Cord Injuries

Identifiers

PMID25266693

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.