| Title |
The role of caregivers in interfacility care transitions: a qualitative study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient preference and adherence, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ppa.s136058 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lianne Jeffs, Marianne Saragosa, Madelyn P Law, Kerry Kuluski, Sherry Espin, Jane Merkley |
| Abstract |
A qualitative design was used to explore the nature of caregiver involvement in care transitions of patients being transferred from an acute care hospital to a rehabilitation hospital. Participants included older adults (n=13), informal caregivers (n=9), and health care professionals (n=50) from inpatient orthopedic units in two academic health science centers and one orthopedic inpatient rehabilitation unit. Semistructured interviews were conducted, audio-taped, and transcribed. Directed content analysis revealed the following four themes: watching, being an active care provider, advocating, and navigating the health care system. Participants described being actively involved in the care of their family member, yet they were not actively engaged by health care professionals to be involved in the care of their family member. There is a need to reconcile the tension between the level of involvement of caregivers in the care of family members who are patients and the level of engagement throughout the care transition. By providing relevant information and authentically engaging caregivers as equal partners in the care transition, they are better able to navigate the health care system post-transfer to the rehabilitation setting and discharge to home. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 54 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 11% |
| Lecturer | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 17% |
| Unknown | 18 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 22 | 41% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 6% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 4% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 4% |
| Psychology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 21 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 August 2017.
All research outputs
#14,974,586
of 25,461,852 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#778
of 1,764 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#165,637
of 327,733 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#24
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,461,852 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,764 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 327,733 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.