ArticleBMJ open quality2024
Reducing wait times for access to inpatient rehabilitation for patients with acquired brain injury: a quality improvement initiative.
Article in BMJ open quality, 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.
- Indonesian Patients' Experiences and Emotional Attachment to Healthcare Services Abroad: A Qualitative Study.Patient preference and adherence · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAcquired brain injury (ABI) is a major cause of disability. Timely access to inpatient ABI rehabilitation is associated with improved outcomes at the patient, system, and societal levels. PROBLEM: Wait times to access the inpatient ABI rehabilitation programme at the local regional rehabilitation centre by patients referred from community hospitals were consistently greater than provincial targets and benchmarks.
objectiveThis initiative aimed to reduce the mean wait times from referral to admission by 30% (from 27 to 19 days) during the 12-month project period. The secondary aim was to concurrently achieve a reduction in the mean wait times for decisions from 9.5 to 5 days during the same period.
methodsA non-randomised time-series design was undertaken. Baseline and postintervention wait times were obtained from patient intake charts. Process mapping, value analysis and five-why analysis were used to identify root causes for delays in the intake process. Referring hospital staff and the ABI Rehab interdisciplinary team members were engaged in change idea development and refinement. Iterative Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles were used to improve the change ideas' usability and uptake. Data analysis was performed using the QI Macros package in Microsoft Excel.
resultsRoot causes for delays included frequent incomplete referrals, variability in the intake process and limitations in rehab bed availability. Two change ideas were introduced: (1) a standardised intake protocol and (2) a referral checklist. Within 3 months, the mean decision wait times were reduced to 4 days (58% reduction), and the mean admission wait times were reduced to 12 days (54% reduction).
conclusionThis initiative led to the systematic standardisation of the intake process for the local regional ABI rehab programme. Wait time improvements surpassing the initial aims were observed and may inform future benchmarks.
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.