ArticleBMJ open quality2026
Improving patient well-being in subacute care: a quality improvement initiative.
Article in BMJ open quality, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Individuals experience lower levels of well-being when admitted to hospital. Maximising well-being may lead to improved outcomes for patients and the health service. We aimed to (1) implement co-designed strategies to improve patient well-being on subacute wards, (2) evaluate the well-being levels of the patient cohort before and after implementation and (3) identify barriers and enablers to implementation of strategies. We conducted a quality improvement study with pre-post evaluation across six subacute wards in a tertiary hospital. Data from interviews with patients and meetings between ward staff and management enabled the co-design of strategies to enhance patient well-being. Strategies were prioritised and implemented using plan, do, study, act cycles. Well-being levels were assessed in the cohort using a scale before (n=153) and after (n=145) implementation. A total of 17 strategies to optimise patient well-being were generated; each ward prioritised implementing key strategies relevant to their setting. While intentions to implement the strategies were high, implementation fidelity of strategies varied due to several barriers identified by staff. Well-being levels reported by patients after implementation were not significantly different from those reported by patients before. Despite extensive consultation and co-design of strategies with patients and staff, well-being levels were not improved at the conclusion of the improvement project. Confounders (such as high hospital demand at the follow-up evaluation time) may have impacted results. Suboptimal implementation fidelity may have also reduced the impact of the initiative.
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.