Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33888104›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2021

Study protocol medical rehabilitation after COVID-19 disease: an observational study with a comparison group with obstructive airway disease / Re_Co.

Mercedes Rutsch, Jördis Frommhold, Heike Buhr-Schinner, Levan Djeiranachvili, Thomas Gross, Per Otto Schüller, Alexander Katalinic, Ruth Deck

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
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. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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.

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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Mercedes RutschInstitute for Social Medicine and Epidemiology, Department Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Lübeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23562, Lübeck, Germany. mercedes.rutsch@uksh.de.
Jördis FrommholdMEDIAN Klinik Heiligendamm, Kinderstrand 1, 18209, Bad Doberan, Germany.
Heike Buhr-SchinnerOstseeklinik Schönberg-Holm, An den Salzwiesen 1, 24217, Schönberg-Holm, Germany.
Levan DjeiranachviliMedian Klinik Flachsheide Bad Salzuflen, Forsthausweg 1, 32105, Bad Salzuflen, Germany.
Thomas GrossReha-Zentrum Schömberg, Römerweg 50, 75328, Schömberg, Germany.
Per Otto SchüllerMEDIAN Klinik Flechtingen, Parkstraße, 39345, Flechtingen, Germany.
Alexander KatalinicInstitute for Social Medicine and Epidemiology, Department Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Lübeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23562, Lübeck, Germany.
Ruth DeckInstitute for Social Medicine and Epidemiology, Department Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Lübeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23562, Lübeck, Germany.
University of Lübeck · DEHospital zum Heiligen Geist · DEKreisklinik Trostberg · DELaboratory Krone · DE

Funding

Deutsche Rentenversicherung Bund 0421/40-64-50-74
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNovel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been the subject of a numerous research projects over the past year. In cases with a severe disease course or threatening long-term impairment due to disease, the German health care system offers insured persons the possibility of medical rehabilitation. In contrast to what was observed and expected at the beginning of the pandemic, COVID-19 patients with varying degrees of disease severity are represented in rehabilitation. To date, there is no common consensus on the content and aftercare of rehabilitation nor is there any knowledge about the short- and long-term effects of such a rehabilitation programme. In addition, these aspects were not considered with regard to the varying severity of the course of the disease. The present research project investigates this question.

methodsThe study sample will consist of N = 350 rehabilitants after COVID-19 and a comparison group (CG) with N = 230 rehabilitants suffering from an obstructive respiratory disease. The participants will be recruited at five German rehabilitation facilities and undergo medical rehabilitation. This prospective, exploratory, multicentre, mixed-methods study will be evaluated as follows: (A) The quantitative portion includes questionnaires at different points in time (at the beginning and end of rehabilitation, after six and twelve months) and contains standardised measurement instruments. For example, participation limitations, quality of life, health status, fatigue, psychomental limitations and disorders, performance in different areas of life and ability to work are measured. (B) Qualitative interviews are held at different times (end of rehabilitation, after six and twelve months), and an expert workshop is conducted. Topics are rehabilitation content, satisfaction and aftercare as well as different outcomes on subjective health and participation impairments. DISCUSSION: Studies on other indications have already shown that pneumological rehabilitation has positive effects. Thus, it is expected that an improvement in different dimensions will be observed at the end of rehabilitation in both groups. With regard to the different severities of COVID-19, this study evaluates the long-term developments. Subsequently, the authors will elaborate concrete recommendations for medical rehabilitation after different courses of disease with regard to existing pneumological rehabilitation concepts.

trial registrationGerman Register of Clinical Trials, www.drks.de .Identifier: DRKS00023642; Registered: 01.12.2020.Date and version identifier: 08.04.2021; version 4.

Indexed as

COVID-19Pulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveHumansObservational Studies as TopicProspective StudiesQuality of LifeSARS-CoV-2Treatment OutcomeCoronavirus diseaseCOVID-19Post‐acuteRehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID33888104
PMCPMC8061875
OpenAlexW3152681005

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.