Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36578360›Full record

ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2022

Quality Improvement in Stroke Rehabilitation: A Scoping Review.

Ingy Shafei, Jonathan Karnon, Maria Crotty

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 2022. 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
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  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

3 authors.

Ingy ShafeiSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Jonathan KarnonSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Maria CrottyCollege of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Quality improvement interventions are used extensively in health care, aiming to improve delivery and promote best practice. The impact of quality improvement interventions implemented in stroke rehabilitation remains unclear. Objective: The aim of this scoping review is to examine the different types of published quality improvement interventions in stroke rehabilitation and their impact on improving the quality of care. Materials and Methods: A scoping review was performed in the PubMed, Embase and CINAHL databases. QI studies evaluating interventions for stroke rehabilitation patients that were published up to August 2020 were included. The review looked at the types of quality improvement interventions that have been evaluated as well as the improvements/impacts reported for quality improvement interventions for stroke patients in rehabilitation. Results: We reviewed 1580 studies, twelve quality improvement interventions met inclusion criteria and were included in the current study. Six studies involved organizational change, three studies involved provider education and audit-feedback and three studies involved provider education. Of the twelve quality improvement interventions that have been included, >90% reported improvements (91.6%). In the majority of cases, improvements were noted through implementation of a myriad of interventions. Several facilitators and barriers were noted during implementation and contributed to success or failure of the intervention. Conclusion: There is paucity of full-text peer-reviewed published research investigating quality improvement interventions for improving the quality of care in stroke rehabilitation. The current review offers value to healthcare providers in terms of key success factors, contextual factors, barriers and facilitators associated with improvements in stroke rehabilitation.

Indexed as

quality improvementquality interventionsreviewscoping reviewstroke rehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID36578360
PMCPMC9791932

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.