ArticleBMC health services research2019
A quality indicator set for use in rehabilitation team care of people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases; development and pilot testing.
Article in BMC health services research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bridging gaps across levels of care in rehabilitation of patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases: Results from a stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial.Clinical rehabilitation · 2023Trial
- Standardised multidisciplinary rehabilitation improves health-related quality of life and productivity costs in patients with rheumatic, musculoskeletal and other diseases.EULAR rheumatology open · 2026Article
- Article
- Impact of provider feedback on quality improvement in rehabilitation services: an interrupted time series analysis.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2025Article
- The effect of patients' socioeconomic status in rehabilitation centers on the efficiency and performance.European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine · 2024Article
- Patient Involvement in the Rehabilitation Process Is Associated with Improvement in Function and Goal Attainment: Results from an Explorative Longitudinal Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- The development of indicators to measure the quality of care in geriatric rehabilitation.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2023Article
- Associations Between Adherence to Self-Management Activities and Change in Function and Health Outcomes in the Rehabilitation of Patients with Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases.Journal of rehabilitation medicine · 2023Article
- [Development of quality standards for patients with axial spondyloarthritis for use in Germany].Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie · 2022Article
- [Development of quality standards for patients with rheumatoid arthritis for use in Germany].Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie · 2022Article
- Associations between quality of health care and clinical outcomes in patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases: a rehabilitation cohort study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2022Article
- Improved quality of physiotherapy care in patients with Whiplash-Associated Disorders: Results based on 16 years of routinely collected data.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- A quality indicator set for rehabilitation services for people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases demonstrates adequate responsiveness in a pre-post evaluation.BMC health services research · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSystems for monitoring effectiveness and quality of rehabilitation services across health care levels are needed. The purpose of this study was to develop and pilot test a quality indicator set for rehabilitation of rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases.
methodsThe set was developed according to the Rand/UCLA Appropriateness Method, which integrates evidence review, in-person multidisciplinary expert panel meetings and repeated anonymous ratings for consensus building. The quality indicators were pilot-tested for overall face validity and feasibility in 15 specialist and 14 primary care rehabilitation units. Pass rates (percentages of "yes") of the indicators were recorded in telephone interviews with 29 unit managers (structure indicators), and 164 patients (process and outcome indicators). Time use and participants' numeric rating of face validity (0-10, 10 = high validity) were recorded.
resultsNineteen structure, 12 process and five outcome indicators were developed and piloted. Mean (range) sum pass rates for the structure, process and outcome indicators were 59%(84%), 66%(100%) and 84%(100%), respectively. Mean (range) face validity score for managers/patients was 8.3 (8)/7.9 (9), and mean answering time was 6.0/5.5 min. The final indicator set consists of 19 structure, 11 process and three outcome indicators.
conclusionTo our knowledge this is the first quality indicator set developed for rehabilitation of rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases. Good overall face validity and a feasible format indicate a set suitable for monitoring quality in rehabilitation. The variation in pass rates between centers indicates a potential for quality improvement in rheumatic and musculoskeletal rehabilitation in Norway.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.