Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42273031›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neurology

Post-discharge "continuum of care" clinical pathway (CP) for persons with severe neuro-disabilities - qualitative research to model needs-based community healthcare, capture the real-life care situation, and assess the appropriateness of the CP's concept with input from community- and hospital-based healthcare professionals.

Stephanie Reichl, Sybille Roschka, Bernadette Einhäupl, Danae Götze, Christopher Schössow, Andreas Bender, Thomas Platz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neurology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Stephanie Reichl *Medical Faculty, Neurorehabilitation Research Group, University of Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.
Sybille Roschka *Medical Faculty, Neurorehabilitation Research Group, University of Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.
Bernadette Einhäupl *Medical Faculty, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, München, Germany.
Danae Götze *Medical Faculty, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, München, Germany.
Christopher SchössowMedical Faculty, Neurorehabilitation Research Group, University of Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.
Andreas Bender *Medical Faculty, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, München, Germany.
Thomas Platz *Medical Faculty, Neurorehabilitation Research Group, University of Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To document opinions and experiences of representatives from three different interest groups regarding "needs-based healthcare" of people with severe neuro-disability requiring home-based specialized intensive care nursing (HSICN) and continued community-based rehabilitation efforts, to evaluate the appropriateness of an evidence- and guideline-based clinical pathway (CP) for trans-sectoral specialist support by regional outreach follow-up teams (ROFT) from inpatient neurological early rehabilitation (NER) and its implementation. Methods: Qualitative exploratory study design: Semi-structured group-interviews with representatives of the three stakeholder groups, i.e., HSICN, therapists in the community (THER-C), and ROFT followed by a multi-stage analysis and interpretation process of their responses. Results: Three interviews-sessions were conducted with a total of 11 group-representatives. A total of 301 individual responses (i) were documented. Based on their experience, the interview partners identified a multitude of relevant aspects for an appropriate needs-based healthcare (i = 80) of the specific clientele, as well as facilitators (i = 44) and barriers (i = 82) for its implementation. The appropriateness of the developed CP was largely confirmed (i = 20). Support by a ROFT (i = 33) was mostly positively evaluated. Additional aspects considered necessary for needs-based healthcare (i = 42) were articulated. Conclusion: The proposed and implemented clinical pathway as a model of "needs-based healthcare" in the community for people with severe neuro-disability and the role of ROFT as an enabling specialist function supporting community healthcare were considered appropriate. The qualitative research identified several system-level constraints as barriers. Some were context-specific, i.e., remuneration for coordination time, fragmented funding streams, and incentives around decannulation/weaning. As presumably universally relevant design principles for the trans-sectoral care approach were identified: multiprofessional workforce capacity and minimum competency standards in the community, center-based specialist support for the community, case management, structured interprofessional exchange, shared documentation, and a potential role of telemedicine. The absence of patient and caregiver perspectives is a relevant limitation to be overcome by future research.

Indexed as

clinical pathwaycommunity-based neurorehabilitationcontinuum of carehealthcaretrans sectoral cooperation

Identifiers

PMID42273031
PMCPMC13248884

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.