ArticleHeliyon2022
Patient autonomy in cardiac inpatient rehabilitation-A COVID-19-specific exploratory trend study.
Article in Heliyon, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The COVID-19 outbreak has changed nearly all societal domains, including medical rehabilitation. Social distancing measures impacted patients as well as health professionals during the rehabilitation process. Enhancing patient participation should not be forgotten during exceptional situations, as restrictive measures are related to the self-determination of patients. Aim: In this exploratory trend study, we aimed to examine the association between COVID-19 restrictions with patients' motivation, their perception of the patient-provider-relationship, their participation in the rehabilitation process and their current state of health at the beginning of their rehabilitation. Methods: Adopting an exploratory approach, we compared data from a convenience sample of two different groups of patients, who stayed at a cardiac rehabilitation clinic at two different time periods: before the COVID-19 lockdown of rehabilitation clinics (n = 128) and after reopening during the COVID-19 period (n = 137). We used questionnaires on motivation for rehabilitation, patient-provider-relationship, patient activation and perceived state of health. We conducted t-tests and regression analysis to determine whether there were differences by gender, age, heart failure status, preferred form of decision-making (shared/not-shared) and time of rehabilitation (before/during COVID-19) related to the outcome variables. Results: Participants evaluated the quality of the patient-provider-relationship in a better way after the reopening of the rehabilitation clinics during the COVID-19 period (p < 0.05), their motivation, participation in the rehabilitation process and their current state of health at the beginning of their rehabilitation was comparable to the group before the COVID-19 lockdown of rehabilitation clinics. Differences in scepticism concerning the treatment and the quality of the patient-provider-relationship were related (p < 0.05) to age and the preferred form of decision-making. Differences in active participation were related (p < 0.05) to sex and differences in the perceived state of health (p < 0.05) to a heart failure diagnosis. Conclusions: Treatment providers could use the time patients spend in isolation after arrival to prepare them for virtual goal-setting conversations to enhance patient participation in exceptional situations.
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.