ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022
Retrospective Evaluation of Discharge Planning Linked to a Long-Term Care 2.0 Project in a Medical Center.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Functional Stratification and Long-Term Care Service Patterns among Discharged Patients with Cancer: A Retrospective Study from Taiwan.Journal of Cancer · 2026Article
- Information sources as determinants of use of formal long-term care: a cross-sectional study in Taiwan.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Effects of Caregiver's Gender or Distance Between Caregiver and Patient's Home on Home Discharge from Hospital in 285 Patients Aged ≥75 Years in Japan.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough there are several studies on discharge planning and long-term care systems in individual programs, research on the connection between discharge planning and the usage of long-term care is scanty. This study aims to evaluate the nature of the association between discharge planning (DP) and long-term care (LTC) and whether the utilization of LTC services improved after being discharged.
methodsThis was a single-center retrospective medical record review study. Secondary data analysis was conducted of DP-LTC participation data between 2018 and 2019. The objectives were to clarify the distinct characteristics of each part of the service to explore the utility rate by overall users and users with willingness and to determine the factors influencing their usage. Medical claims were used to identify inpatients receiving discharge services, and data were matched with LTC system engagement data (
resultsA total of 94% (2042/2155) of inpatients expressed a perceived need for LTC services, of which 14% (285/2042) were users of LTC services after discharge. When assessed by case-mix system (CMS) and willingness to use services during hospitalization, inpatients had higher rates of service utilization after discharge. Using LTC services was most likely to be associated with obesity, disability, high CMS level, higher education, and women.
conclusionThe study confirms that the utilization of LTC services has improved under the integrated DP-LTC system. The gap between willing and actual users is worth considering. In the assessment stage, special attention should be paid to the service needs of persons with BMI ≥ 27 and disabilities. Future research with a larger sample could comprehensively evaluate the impact of integrated DP services on the use of LTC 2.0 service resources.
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.