ArticleAnnals of transplantation2024
Implementation and Evaluation of Discharge Planning for Patients Undergoing Umbilical Cord Blood Transplantation.
Article in Annals of transplantation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Assessment of Readiness for Discharge and Its Psychosocial Determinants in Kidney and Liver Transplant Patients in Poland-A Cross-Sectional Analytical Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Umbilical cord blood transplantation (UCBT) patients have high rates of unplanned readmissions and poor quality of life (QoL). The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of discharge planning on unplanned readmissions, self-efficacy, QoL, and clinical outcomes. MATERIAL AND METHODS Patients who received their first UCBT from April 2022 to March 2023 were included. Participants (n=72) were assigned to a control group (CG: received usual care) or an intervention group (IG: received discharge planning from admission to 100 days after UCBT). The cumulative readmission rates 30 days after discharge and 100 days after UCBT were analyzed using the log-rank test. Self-efficacy and QoL were assessed at admission and 100 days after UCBT using the General Self-Efficacy Scale and FACT-BMT version 4, clinical outcomes derived from medical records. RESULTS Sixty-six patients completed the study. Discharge planning did not reduce readmission rates 30 days after discharge (20.59% vs 31.25%, P=0.376) or 100 days after UCBT (29.41% vs 34.38%, P=0.629). However, the IG showed significantly better self-efficacy (P<0.001), and except for social and emotional well-being, all the other dimensions and 3 total scores of FACT-BMT in the IG were higher than for the controls at 100 days after UCBT (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS The discharge planning program can improve self-efficacy and QoL of UCBT recipients. The implementation of discharge planning for patients undergoing UCBT was necessary for successful hospital-to-home transitions.
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.