Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28086867›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2017

Process evaluation of an integrated care pathway in geriatric rehabilitation for people with complex health problems.

Irma H J Everink, Jolanda C M van Haastregt, Jose M C Maessen, Jos M G A Schols, Gertrudis I J M Kempen

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Building Consensus on an Integrated Care Pathway in Geriatric Rehabilitation: A Modified Delphi Study Among Professional Experts.Journal of applied gerontology : the official journal of the Southern Gerontological Society · 2020
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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.

Irma H J EverinkDepartment of Health Services Research and Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200, MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands. i.everink@maastrichtuniversity.nl.
Jolanda C M van HaastregtDepartment of Health Services Research and Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200, MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Jose M C MaessenDepartment of Patient & Integrated Care, Maastricht University Medical Centre, P.O.Box 5800, 6202 AZ, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Jos M G A ScholsDepartment of Health Services Research and Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200, MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Gertrudis I J M KempenDepartment of Health Services Research and Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200, MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAn integrated care pathway in geriatric rehabilitation was developed to improve coordination and continuity of care for community-living older adults in the Netherlands, who go through the process of hospital admission, admission to a geriatric rehabilitation facility and discharge back to the home situation. This pathway is a complex intervention and is focused on improving communication, triage and transfers of patients between the hospital, geriatric rehabilitation facility and primary care organisations. A process evaluation was performed to assess the feasibility of this pathway.

methodsThe study design incorporated mixed methods. Feasibility was assessed thru if the pathway was implemented according to plan (fidelity and dose delivered), (b) if patients, informal caregivers and professionals were satisfied with the pathway (dose received) and (c) which barriers and facilitators influenced implementation (context). These components were derived from the theoretical framework of Saunders and colleagues. Data were collected using three structured face-to-face interviews with patients, self-administered questionnaires among informal caregivers, and group interviews with professionals. Furthermore, data were collected from the information transfer system in the hospital, patient files of the geriatric rehabilitation facility and minutes of evaluation meetings.

resultsIn total, 113 patients, 37 informal caregivers and 19 healthcare professionals participated in this process evaluation. The pathway was considered largely feasible as two components were fully implemented according to plan and two components were largely implemented according to plan. The timing and quality of medical discharge summaries were not sufficiently implemented according to plan and professionals indicated that the triage instrument needed refinement. Healthcare professionals were satisfied with the implementation of the pathway and they indicated that due to improved collaboration, the quality of care provision improved. Although patients and informal caregivers were also satisfied with the care provision in the pathway, they indicated that the care organisations involved should pay more attention towards providing information about their treatment.

conclusionsThis process evaluation showed that patients, informal caregivers and professionals are fairly satisfied with the care provision in the pathway and professionals reported that collaboration improved. Extra attention should be paid to the components in the pathway that were not implemented according to plan.

trial registrationISRCTN90000867 Registered 7 April 2016.

Indexed as

AdultAgedCaregiversChronic DiseaseCommunicationCritical PathwaysDelivery of Health Care, IntegratedFeasibility StudiesFemaleHealth PersonnelHealth Services for the AgedHumansMaleNetherlandsPatient TransferPrimary Health CareContinuity of patient careFeasibility studiesGeriatric rehabilitationImplementationIntegrated care pathwayPatient transferProcess evaluation

Identifiers

PMID28086867
PMCPMC5237356

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.