ArticleBMC geriatrics2025
Home-based geriatric rehabilitation after inpatient rehabilitation: a redesign and feasibility study.
Article in BMC geriatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Remote exercise snacking and fall-related functional outcomes in older adults: a systematic review including a meta-analysis.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Pooled it
- Requirements for the scale up of a geriatric aftercare program: a qualitative interview study with stakeholders - findings from the GeRas project.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Exploring cost trajectories of patients admitted to geriatric rehabilitation in the Netherlands.Age and ageing · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is a shift from inpatient to home-based geriatric rehabilitation (HBGR), and potential benefits are demonstrated. Previously, a theoretical HBGR model, version 1.0, has been developed, outlining its essential components. However, clear guidance on the practical design and organisation of HBGR in everyday practice is still lacking. Therefore, determining the optimal design for this complex intervention is essential for its successful implementation in daily practice. The objective of this study is to redesign the theoretical HBGR trajectory and assess its feasibility, acceptability, and usability from both patient and professional perspectives.
methodsA redesign and feasibility study based on the MRC framework was conducted in a Dutch skilled nursing facility using the MRC framework in co-creation with eleven healthcare professionals and four patient representatives. The HBGR trajectory 1.0, comprises four building blocks (structure, process, environment, and outcomes) based on the Post-Acute-Care rehabilitation quality framework. Version 1.0 was redesigned during the development phase and subsequently pilot-tested in daily practice during the feasibility phase. Adjustments were made based on semi-structured interviews with ten patients and (interim) evaluations.
resultsThe HBGR trajectory 1.0 has been redesigned into version 2.0. It contains eleven elements: individualised goal setting, providing HBGR is the default unless otherwise indicated, an information letter, blended eHealth, mapping the patient's living environment, stimulation support from informal caregivers, collaboration with community care nursing, rehabilitation coordination, central planning, therapy at home, and online multidisciplinary evaluation. Version 2.0 was enthusiastically endorsed by patients, patient representatives, and professionals, who found it feasible, acceptable, and usable in daily practice.
conclusionThe HBGR trajectory 1.0 was adapted, tested, and finally redesigned into version 2.0. The study revealed that involving patients, their representatives, and healthcare professionals was critical to garnering support and facilitating implementation. Key developments align with global trends and include the successful integration of eHealth with traditional treatment methods, enhanced collaboration and knowledge sharing among community care nurses, and increased involvement of informal caregivers in rehabilitation. This redesigned HBGR trajectory is ready for evaluation and implementation in follow-up effectiveness research.
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.