MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214913337 · doi:10.1177/21514593211047666

Barriers and Enablers to Early Identification, Referral and Access to Geriatric Rehabilitation Post-Hip Fracture: A Theory-Based Descriptive Qualitative Study

2022· article· en· W4214913337 on OpenAlexaff
Chantal Backman, Anne Harley, Steve Papp, Véronique French-Merkley, Paul E. Beaulé, Stéphane Poitras, Johanna Dobransky, Janet E. Squires

Bibliographic record

VenueGeriatric Orthopaedic Surgery & Rehabilitation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHip and Femur Fractures
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalBruyèreUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRehabilitationReferralHip fractureMedicineClinical pathwayQualitative researchGeriatricsGeriatric rehabilitationDescriptive researchNursingGeriatric careDescriptive statisticsPhysical therapyFamily medicinePsychiatryOsteoporosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Geriatric hip fracture patients often experience gaps in care including variability in the timing and the choice of an appropriate setting for rehabilitation following hip fracture surgery. Many guidelines recommend standardized processes, including timely access of no later than day 6 to rehabilitation services. A pathway for early identification, referral and access to geriatric rehabilitation post-hip fracture was created to facilitate the implementation. The study aimed to describe the barriers and enablers prior to the implementation of this pathway. Methods: We conducted a qualitative descriptive study consisting of semi-structured interviews with geriatric hip fracture patients (n = 8), caregivers (n = 1), administrators (n = 12) and clinicians (n = 17) in 2 orthopaedics units and a geriatric rehabilitation service. Responses were analysed using a systematic approach, and overarching themes describing the barriers and enablers were identified. Results: The clinicians' and administrators' top barriers to implementation of the pathway were competing demands (n = 24); lack of bed availability, community resources and funding (n = 19); and the need for extended hours and increased staff (n = 16). The top 3 enablers were clear communication with patients (n = 27), awareness of the benefits of geriatric rehabilitation (n = 24) and the need for education and resources to properly use the pathway (n = 15). Common barriers among patients and caregivers included lack of care coordination, overcoming some of their own specific challenges during their transition, gaps in the information they received before discharge, not knowing what questions to ask and lack of resources. Despite these barriers, patients were generally pleased with their transition from the hospital to geriatric rehabilitation. Conclusion: We identified and described key barriers and enablers to early identification, referral and access to geriatric rehabilitation post-hip fracture. These influencing factors provide a basis for the development of a standardized pathway aimed at improving access to rehabilitative care for geriatric hip fracture patients.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.008
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeriatric Orthopaedic Surgery & RehabilitationSame topicHip and Femur FracturesFrench-language works237,207