ArticleSpinal cord2025
Patient flow problems affecting in-patient spinal cord injury rehabilitation in the Netherlands.
Article in Spinal cord, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designProspective cohort study.
objectivesTo describe barriers to admission to and discharge from an inpatient rehabilitation unit for patients with newly acquired spinal cord injury or disease (SCI/D) and to identify modifiable factors whereby patient flow can be optimized.
settingNetherlands.
methodsIn-patients with newly acquired SCI/D referred to a rehabilitation centre in the Netherlands between December 2018 and December 2019 were included. Demographic, clinical characteristics and information about waiting days and causes of delay were recorded. Descriptive analysis was used.
resultsIn total, 105 patients were included; 33 patients (31%) were female, mean age was 59 years, 60% had a non-traumatic SCI/D, 42% of the SCI/D were tetraplegia and 62% were AIS D at referral. No significant differences in demographic or clinical characteristics were found between patients with and without a barrier to admission. Most common admission barriers were bed availability and capacity of nursing and other health staff. The most frequent discharge barriers were delay in care approval, lack of availability of nursing home places and waiting for home modifications.
conclusionMost frequent admission barriers were availability of beds and staffing capacity; most discharge barriers were problems with home modifications, waiting for care approval or a nursing home place. Recommendations for reducing these barriers are recognizing a potential problem at an early stage, timely communication with patient and/or family about options for discharge, while simultaneously initiating a home modification plan and exploring temporary accommodation options.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39856328What 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.