MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Experiences of informal caregivers taking care of heart surgery patients after discharge from hospital: a qualitative study

2023· article· en· W4388601225 on OpenAlexaff
Ingrid Anne Lie, Philip Moons, T Tonnessen, Sigrun Halvorsen, Mitti Blakoe, C H Moller, Mari‐Liis Kaljusto, M. L. Parry, Ann Kristin Bjørnnes, Ida Elisabeth Højskov

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineThematic analysisQualitative researchHealth carePhoneNext of kinNursingFamily medicineMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background/Introduction Open heart surgery is still the main treatment option for severe coronary and heart valve disease. After discharge from hospital, caregivers of heart surgery patients are given the main responsibility for care of their next of kin at home. There is a lack of studies on caregivers’ experiences with information from health care professionals regarding the discharge to home. Purpose To explore the informal caregivers' information and communication experiences with health care professionals following discharge to home after heart surgery Methods In-depth interviews using a semi-structured interview guide during videotelephony (Facetime), phone or face-to-face onsite interview. The settings were university hospitals in Norway and Denmark respectively and were carried out between November 2022 – January 2023. Data was analyzed in the NVivo software tool following Braun and Clarke`s 6-step thematic analysis process. Results Twelve informal caregivers (10 women, 2 men, mean age 65 years) were interviewed two to four weeks after the heart surgery patient had been discharged to home. Four main themes were identified: i) Lack of information ii) Insecurity, iii) Responsibility without knowledge and iv) Readmission to hospital is a challenge. Shortly after discharge the caregivers realized the consequences of lack of information and knowledge to facilitate for their next of kin` comfort, and how to manage if their symptoms worsened. Several caregivers were afraid, and especially if readmission to hospital due to serious complications were needed (Figure 1). Conclusion(s) Informal caregivers of heart surgery patients lack information from health care professionals, and communication with health care professionals at hospital discharge to gain knowledge, feel secured, and to be prepared for the responsibility for follow-up of their next of kin at home.Figure 1.Caregivers heart surgery pts.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.298 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal→Same topicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units→French-language works237,207→