Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39830386›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in medicine2024

Transitioning to a virtual post-intensive care rehabilitation service in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: results of multidisciplinary focus-groups.

Fiona Howroyd, Natacha Earle, Jonathan Weblin, David McWilliams, Mark Raven, Niharika A Duggal, Zubair Ahmed, Tonny Veenith

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Fiona HowroydUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Natacha EarleUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Jonathan WeblinUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
David McWilliamsCentre for Care Excellence, University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust, Coventry, United Kingdom.
Mark RavenUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Niharika A DuggalDepartment of Inflammation and Ageing, School of Infection, Inflammation and Immunology, College of Medicine and Health, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Zubair AhmedUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Tonny VeenithRoyal Wolverhampton Hospital, New Cross Hospital, Wolverhampton, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Telehealth has vastly expanded since the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic and has been widely implemented as an efficient, cost-effective and accepted means of health care delivery, including rehabilitation. Although telerehabilitation is recommended across national guidelines, there is a lack of practical guidance to support clinicians with virtual adaptations. Aims: This study aimed to describe the key components of a safe and effective virtual post-intensive-care rehabilitation service, through qualitative exploration. Methods: This is a qualitative study using a focus-group design based upon grounded theory. This study is nested within a service development project, taking place during the COVID-19 pandemic. Focus groups were held after the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic with key stakeholders from the physiotherapy and critical care departments of a large tertiary hospital in the United Kingdom. Semi-structured questions were used to guide discussions, led by a facilitator and scribe. Transcripts were thematically analysed using an exploratory inductive approach by two researchers then crosschecked. Findings: Three focus groups were attended by 12 multidisciplinary stakeholders, including six physiotherapists, two administration staff members, two critical-care follow-up nurses and two critical care consultants. Thematic analysis identified seven critical elements for virtual adaptations: (1) safety and risk assessment, (2) assessment and outcome measures, (3) virtual platform, (4) resources and equipment, (5) exercise programme adaptation, (6) exercise monitoring and safety, and (7) privacy and information governance. Conclusion: Our findings provide practical recommendations for virtual rehabilitation service development and delivery.

Indexed as

critical carephysical therapyphysiotherapySARS-CoV-2telehealthtelerehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID39830386
PMCPMC11738926

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.