ArticleNursing open2023
Medical staff's perception of factors contributing to accelerated rehabilitation in patients with cervical spinal cord injury: A qualitative research.
Article in Nursing open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Best-evidence summary of pulmonary rehabilitation strategies for adult patients with cervical spinal cord injury: a systematic review.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Real emotional experience of family members of patients transported within hospital in neurosurgical intensive care unit: A descriptive qualitative study.Nursing open · 2024Article
- Medical staff's perception of factors contributing to accelerated rehabilitation in patients with cervical spinal cord injury: A qualitative research.Nursing open · 2023Article
- Facilitators and barriers in the rehabilitation process described by persons with spinal cord injury: a deductive-inductive analysis from the Finnish spinal cord injury study.Annals of medicine · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo explore the factors affecting the quality of accelerated rehabilitation for patients with cervical spinal cord injury, therefore, to propose targeted improvement strategies and provide reference for promoting the quality of nursing care for accelerated rehabilitation.
designThis descriptive qualitative inquiry followed the COREQ guidelines.
methodsFrom December 2020 to April 2021, 16 subjects including orthopaedic nurses, nursing management experts, orthopaedic surgeons, anaesthesiologists and physical therapists experienced in accelerated rehabilitation were selected by objective sampling method to conduct semi-structured interviews. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the interview content.
resultsThrough analysis and summary of the interview data, the following two themes and nine sub-themes were finally extracted. Factors related to the quality of accelerated rehabilitation structure include: construction of multidisciplinary teams, thorough system guarantee and adequate staffing. Factors related to the quality of accelerated rehabilitation process include: inadequate training and assessment, lack of medical staff's awareness, incapability of the accelerated rehabilitation team members, poor multidisciplinary communication and collaboration, lack of patient's awareness, and ineffective health education.
conclusionQuality of implementation of accelerated rehabilitation can be improved by maximizing the role of multidisciplinary team, establishing a flawless accelerated rehabilitation system, increasing allocation of nursing resources, enhancing knowledge of medical staff, improving their awareness of accelerated rehabilitation, establishing personalized clinical pathways of accelerated rehabilitation, increasing communication and collaboration among multidisciplinary disciplines, and improving health education of patients.
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.