Exploring patient acceptability of a short‐stay care pathway in hospital post arthroplasty: A theory‐informed qualitative study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION: Arthroplasty is an effective, yet costly, surgical procedure for end-stage osteoarthritis. Shorter stays in hospital are being piloted in Australia. In some countries, short stay is established practice, associated with improving perioperative care and enhanced recovery after surgery practices. Exploring the acceptability to patients of a short stay care pathway in hospital postarthroplasty is important for informing health policy, adoption and potential scalability of this model of care. METHODS: Consecutive patients at one site, at least 3 months post total joint arthroplasty, were invited to participate in theory-informed semi-structured qualitative interviews. The Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA) informed development of the interview guide. Interview data were analysed using the Framework Method. RESULTS: Eighteen patients were invited. Fifteen consented to be contacted and were interviewed. Short-stay post arthroplasty was highly acceptable to patients who had the supports necessary to recover safely at home. Key findings were as follows: flexibility of short-stay care pathway was essential and valued; prior beliefs and expectations informed acceptability; and the absence of out-of-pocket expenses had an incentivizing effect, but was not the primary reason for patients choosing this care pathway. Further themes analysed within the TFA constructs highlighted nuances of acceptability relating to this model of care. CONCLUSIONS: A short stay in hospital post arthroplasty appeared to be acceptable to patients who had experienced this care pathway. Our thematic findings identified aspects of the short-stay care pathway that enhanced acceptability and some aspects that limited acceptability. These findings can inform refinement of the short-stay care pathway. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients/people with lived experience were not involved in the study design or conduct of this preliminary work; as this short-stay model of care was recently introduced, only a small group of patients was eligible to participate in this study. This study is the first step towards understanding the experiences of patients about a short-stay model of care post arthroplasty. The findings will help inform future patient and public involvement in expanding the programme.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».