ArticleThe British journal of occupational therapy2022
Exploring how occupational therapists and physiotherapists evaluate rehabilitation potential of older people in acute care.
Article in The British journal of occupational therapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Standard-of-care vs expert-recommended discharge destinations for geriatric surgical inpatients: a prospective observational cohort study.European geriatric medicine · 2026Observational
- Identifying Key Predictors of Appropriate Discharge Destinations for Older Inpatients in Acute Care: Scoping Review.Interactive journal of medical research · 2026Review
- Exploring professional reasoning in occupational therapy: A scoping review of recent research.The British journal of occupational therapy · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Evaluations of rehabilitation potential are an everyday occurrence, yet the concept is poorly understood and there is a lack of understanding about the reasoning process. This study aimed to explore how occupational therapists and physiotherapists evaluated the rehabilitation potential of older people following an acute hospital admission. Method: Focused ethnography was utilised, primarily using observation, interviewing and review of records within one acute medical ward in a general hospital in the United Kingdom. Five patient participants gave consent for their episode of care to be studied, for interactions with professionals to be observed and for their clinical records to be reviewed. Three occupational therapists and two physiotherapists then participated in individual interviews. Findings: Thematic analysis of data led to the identification of a four-stage reasoning process. The four stages are as follows: gathering baseline information; provision of curative and supportive interventions; provision and monitoring of rehabilitative interventions; the evaluation of rehabilitation potential and decision about the subsequent pathway. Conclusions: The reasoning process illustrates the professional reasoning of occupational therapists and physiotherapists when evaluating rehabilitation potential for older adults in acute care. However, it also highlights vulnerabilities to professional reasoning which may contribute to subjectivity, inconsistency or risk to patients.
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.