MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2049008828 · doi:10.4236/aar.2013.21006

Barriers and facilitators to an outreach rehabilitation program delivered in nursing homes after hip fracture surgical repair

2013· article· en· W2049008828 on OpenAlexafffund
Donna M. Wilson, Sandra Robertson, C Allyson Jones, D. W. C. Johnston, Lauren A Beaupré

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Aging Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHip and Femur Fractures
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersAlberta InnovatesAlberta Heritage Foundation for Medical ResearchFondation pour la Recherche Médicale
KeywordsOutreachRehabilitationNursingMedicinePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: To identify and understand facilitators and barriers to implementing an Outreach rehabilitation program designed to improve post-operative recovery following hip fracture in long-term care residents. Residents of nursing home facilities are at considerable risk of hip fracture and minimal recovery following a hip fracture. Methods: Data were gathered over June-August, 2012 through semi-structured interviews or focus groups. Fifteen persons (n = 15) who were members of the Outreach rehabilitation team (n = 8) or relevant nursing home staff (n = 7) were interviewed. Data analysis was guided by principles of grounded theory method. Findings: Three major themes that contributed to or hindered the Outreach rehabilitation program emerged, namely, 1) the division, the separate operation and delivery of rehabilitation services; 2) building bridges, or negotiating ways to communicate and work together, and 3) strength in the structure, the acceptance of the program and the perceived benefits of the program. One main challenge to program implementation con- cerned coordinating additional rehabilitation with the rehabilitation provided within the nursing homes. Facility staff was largely unaware of the program and were unprepared to work with Outreach team members. As the program progressed, the facility staff and Outreach team were able to collaborate to overcome resident health issues impeding recovery such as cognitive impairment, language barriers and post-surgical pain control needs. Facilitators included the consistency of Outreach team members and accessible facility staff, which contributed to effective communication and trust between the Outreach team and facility staff. Facilitators also included support for the program by the Outreach team and facility staff, as well as the potential benefits of improved mobility and functional status among some program recipients. Conclusion: Although planning, implementation, and delivery of an Outreach rehabilitation program present some challenges, this study suggests that it is possible to deliver rehabilitation to older residents who fracture their hips in nursing homes.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.335
Threshold uncertainty score0.480

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.397 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Aging ResearchSame topicHip and Femur FracturesFrench-language works237,207