Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33610174›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2021

A quality indicator set for rehabilitation services for people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases demonstrates adequate responsiveness in a pre-post evaluation.

Anne-Lene Sand-Svartrud, Gunnhild Berdal, Maryam Azimi, Ingvild Bø, Turid Nygaard Dager, Siv Grødal Eppeland, Guro Ohldieck Fredheim, Anne Sirnes Hagland, Åse Klokkeide, Anita Dyb Linge and 5 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03102814 (The BRIDGE Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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.

NCT03102814 nacompletednot on this map

The BRIDGE Trial: A Multicenter RCT to Improve Continuity and Quality in Rehabilitation of People With Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases

TypeinterventionalSponsorNational Resource Center for Rehabilitation in RheumatologyRan2017 to 2019Enrolled381ConditionsMusculoskeletal DiseaseArmsCurrent rehabilitation, The BRIDGE program
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

15 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Anne-Lene Sand-SvartrudNational Advisory Unit on Rehabilitation in Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital, PO Box 23, Vinderen, N-0319, Oslo, Norway. anne-lene.svartrud@diakonsyk.no.
Gunnhild BerdalNational Advisory Unit on Rehabilitation in Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital, PO Box 23, Vinderen, N-0319, Oslo, Norway.
Maryam AzimiDiakonhjemmet Hospital, PO Box 23, Vinderen, N-0319, Oslo, Norway.
Ingvild BøHospital for Rheumatic Diseases Lillehammer, Margrethe Grundtvigs veg 6, N-2609, Lillehammer, Norway.
Turid Nygaard DagerNational Advisory Unit on Rehabilitation in Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital, PO Box 23, Vinderen, N-0319, Oslo, Norway.
Siv Grødal EppelandSørlandet Hospital Arendal, PO Box 416, Lundsiden, N-4604, Kristiansand, Norway.
Guro Ohldieck FredheimVikersund Rehabilitation Center, Haaviks vei 25, N-3370, Vikersund, Norway.
Anne Sirnes HaglandHospital for Rheumatic Diseases Haugesund, PO Box 2175, N-5504, Haugesund, Norway.
Åse KlokkeideRehabilitering Vest Rehabilitation Center, PO Box 2175, N-5504, Haugesund, Norway.
Anita Dyb LingeMuritunet Rehabilitation Center, Grandedata 58, N-6210, Valldal, Norway.
Kjetil TennebøValnesfjord Health Sports Center, Østerkløftveien 249, N-8215, Valnesfjord, Norway.
Helene Lindtvedt ValaasVikersund Rehabilitation Center, Haaviks vei 25, N-3370, Vikersund, Norway.
Ann Margret AasvoldMeråker Rehabilitation Center, Østigardsveien 24, N-7530, Meråker, Norway.
Hanne DagfinrudNational Advisory Unit on Rehabilitation in Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital, PO Box 23, Vinderen, N-0319, Oslo, Norway.
Ingvild KjekenNational Advisory Unit on Rehabilitation in Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital, PO Box 23, Vinderen, N-0319, Oslo, Norway.
Diakonhjemmet Hospital · NOPrivatsykehuset Haugesund · NOSørlandet Hospital Arendal · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundQuality of care is gaining increasing attention in research, clinical practice, and health care planning. Methods for quality assessment and monitoring, such as quality indicators (QIs), are needed to ensure health services in line with norms and recommendations. The aim of this study was to assess the responsiveness of a newly developed QI set for rehabiliation for people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs).

methodsWe used two yes/no questionnaires to measure quality from both the provider and patient perspectives, scored in a range of 0-100% (best score, 100%). We collected QI data from a multicenter stepped-wedge cluster-randomized controlled trial (the BRIDGE trial) that compared traditional rehabilitation with a new BRIDGE program designed to improve quality and continuity in rehabilitation. Assessment of the responsiveness was performed as a pre-post evaluation: Providers at rehabilitation centers in Norway completed the center-reported QIs (n = 19 structure indicators) before (T1) and 6-8 weeks after (T2) adding the BRIDGE intervention. The patient-reported QIs comprised 14 process and outcomes indicators, measuring quality in health services from the patient perspective. Pre-intervention patient-reported data were collected from patients participating in the traditional program (T1), and post-intervention data were collected from patients participating in the BRIDGE program (T2). The patient groups were comparable. We used a construct approach, with a priori hypotheses regarding the expected direction and magnitude of PR changes between T1 and T2. For acceptable responsivess, at least 75% of the hypotheses needed to be confirmed.

resultsAll eight participating centers and 82% of the patients (293/357) completed the QI questionnaires. Responsiveness was acceptable, with 44 of 53 hypotheses (83%) confirmed for single indicators and 3 of 4 hypotheses (75%) confirmed for the sum scores.

conclusionWe found this QI set for rehabilitation to be responsive when applied in rehabilitation services for adults with various RMD conditions. We recommend this QI set as a timely method for establishing quality-of-rehabilitation benchmarks, promoting important progress toward high-quality rehabilitation, and tracking trends over time.

trial registrationThe study is part of the larger BRIDGE trial, registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT03102814).

Indexed as

Continuity of Patient CareMusculoskeletal DiseasesQuality Indicators, Health CareRheumatic DiseasesAdultBenchmarkingHumansMulticenter Studies as TopicNorwayRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRehabilitation CentersSurveys and QuestionnairesHealth careMusculoskeletal diseaseQuality indicatorRehabilitationResponsiveness

Identifiers

PMID33610174
PMCPMC7896401
OpenAlexW3108089196

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.