Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29605966›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2018

Patient experience of centralized acute stroke care pathways.

Catherine Perry, Iliatha Papachristou, Angus I G Ramsay, Ruth J Boaden, Christopher McKevitt, Simon J Turner, Charles D A Wolfe, Naomi J Fulop

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Patient experience of centralized acute stroke care pathways.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2018
    Article
  6. 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

8 authors.

Catherine PerryAlliance Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8496-6923
Iliatha PapachristouDepartment of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK.
Angus I G RamsayDepartment of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK.
Ruth J BoadenAlliance Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Christopher McKevittDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health Sciences, Kings College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5290-4613
Simon J TurnerCentre for Primary Care, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Charles D A WolfeDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health Sciences, Kings College London, London, UK.
Naomi J FulopDepartment of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5306-6140

Funding

Department of Health 10/1009/09
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn 2010, Greater Manchester (GM) and London centralized acute stroke care services into a reduced number of hyperacute stroke units, with local stroke units providing on-going care nearer patients' homes.

objectiveTo explore the impact of centralized acute stroke care pathways on the experiences of patients.

designQualitative interview study. Thematic analysis was undertaken, using deductive and inductive approaches. Final data analysis explored themes related to five chronological phases of the centralized stroke care pathway. SETTING AND

participantsRecruitment from 3 hospitals in GM (15 stroke patients/8 family members) and 4 in London (21 stroke patients/9 family members).

resultsParticipants were impressed with emergency services and initial reception at hospital: disquiet about travelling further than a local hospital was allayed by clear explanations. Participants knew who was treating them and were involved in decisions. Difficulties for families visiting hospitals a distance from home were raised. Repatriation to local hospitals was not always timely, but no detrimental effects were reported. Discharge to the community was viewed less positively. DISCUSSION AND

conclusionsPatients on the centralized acute stroke care pathways reported many positive aspects of care: the centralization of care pathways can offer patients a good experience. Disadvantages of travelling further were perceived to be outweighed by the opportunity to receive the best quality care. This study highlights the necessity for all staff on a centralized care pathway to provide clear and accessible information to patients, in order to maximize their experience of care.

Indexed as

Centralized Hospital ServicesFamilyPatient SatisfactionAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCritical CareFemaleHumansLondonMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchStrokecentralization of servicespatient/carer experiencestroke care

Identifiers

PMID29605966
PMCPMC6186538

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.