ArticleCureus2025
Experiences of COVID-19 Patients With Person-Centred Care During Cohort Isolation: A Mixed-Method Study.
Article in Cureus, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Quality of care may have been compromised during the exceptionally hectic period of the COVID-19 waves, including isolation precautions. Aims Experiences with person-centred care and wellbeing of COVID-19 patients admitted to a cohort isolation nursing ward during the first pandemic wave were explored, including differences between the acute phase (March 2020) and semi-acute phase (April-June 2020). Methods A convergent parallel mixed-method design was used. Adult no post-ICU patients visiting the outpatient clinic for COVID-19 aftercare between May and September 2020 six to eight weeks after discharge from the COVID-19 hospital ward were asked to participate. Part 1 comprised Patient Reported Experience Measure (PREM) questionnaires (n=134) and part 2 semi-structured interviews (n=30). Thematic analysis was performed, and themes were linked to the domains of the person-centred care framework. Results Part 1: Median scores on all the questions of the PREM were high. The lowest scores on the PREM questionnaire were seen on shared decision-making during the acute phase. Part 2: In line with this, the interviews also indicated that the majority of patients had positive experiences regarding person-centred care and that patients felt a limited need for interaction in shared decision-making. Additionally, it was learned from the interviews that the domain care environment was affected most by the pandemic: the isolation precautions had an impact on patients' wellbeing, although they understood the necessity for isolation precautions to protect others. Patients felt lonely, missed physical contact with family and friends, and felt that contact with healthcare professionals was influenced by isolation clothes. Although some still felt isolated, the cohort department contributed to a feeling of engagement with other patients having the same illness. Conclusion Delivered care was positively experienced by patients despite the hectic outbreak period. Patients understood and adapted their preferences to the circumstances. However, patients' wellbeing was influenced by the circumstances in which care was received. To improve patients' wellbeing during isolation, recognisability of healthcare workers should be stimulated, visits from family and friends should be allowed, and no use of single-room isolation is advised.
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.