Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36287186›Full record

ArticleJournal of rehabilitation medicine2022

Frequency and Characteristics of Medical Complications in Rehabilitation Settings: A Scoping Review.

Elyse Ladbrook, Stephane Bouchoucha, Ana Hutchinson

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of rehabilitation medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Elyse LadbrookSchool of Nursing, Midwifery & Public Health, University of Canberra, Canberra. elyse.ladbrook@canberra.edu.au.
Stephane BouchouchaCentre for Quality and Patient Safety Research, School of Nursing & Midwifery, Deakin University, Burwood, Victoria, Australia.
Ana HutchinsonCentre for Quality and Patient Safety Research, School of Nursing & Midwifery, Deakin University, Burwood, Victoria, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo synthesize the available evidence on medical complications occurring in adult patients in subacute inpatient rehabilitation, and to describe the impact on subacute length of stay and readmission to acute care.

designScoping review. SUBJECTS: Adult patients, within the inpatient rehabilitation environment, who experienced medical complications, clinical deterioration and/or the requirement of transfer to acute care.

methodsA systematic search of MEDLINE and CINAHL electronic databases was undertaken to identify primary research studies published in English and French during the period 2000-2021. Study reporting followed the standards indicated by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews checklist (PRISMA-ScR).

resultsA total of 47 studies were identified for inclusion. Key results included differences in the type and frequency of complications according to admission type, the proportion of patients experiencing at least 1 complication, and complications associated with transfer to acute care.

conclusionPatients admitted for inpatient rehabilitation are at high risk of medical complications and may not be medically stable during their admission, requiring care by clinicians with expertise in functional rehabilitation, and ongoing management by members of the multidisciplinary team with expertise in acute general medicine, infectious diseases and recognition and response to clinical deterioration.

Indexed as

Clinical DeteriorationAdultHospitalizationHumansInpatients

Identifiers

PMID36287186
PMCPMC9757543

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.