An international survey of the structure and process of care for traumatic spinal cord injury in acute and rehabilitation facilities: lessons learned from a pilot study

4Citations
Citations of this article
9Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: To describe the key findings and lessons learned from an international pilot study that surveyed spinal cord injury programs in acute and rehabilitation facilities to understand the status of spinal cord injury care. Methods: An online survey with two questionnaires, a 74-item for acute care and a 51-item for rehabilitation, was used. A subset of survey items relevant to the themes of specialized care, timeliness, patient-centeredness, and evidence-based care were operationalized as structure or process indicators. Percentages of facilities reporting the structure or process to be present, and percentages of indicators met by each facility were calculated and reported separately for facilities from high-income countries (HIC) and from low and middle-income countries (LMIC) to identify “hard to meet” indicators defined as those met by less than two-thirds of facilities and to describe performance level. Results: A total of 26 acute and 26 rehabilitation facilities from 25 countries participated in the study. The comparison of the facilities based on the country income level revealed three general observations: 1) some indicators were met equally well by both HIC and LMIC, such as 24-hour access to CT scanners in acute care and out-patient services at rehabilitation facilities; 2) some indicators were hard to meet for LMIC but not for HIC, such as having a multidisciplinary team for both acute and rehabilitation settings; and 3) some indicators were hard to meet by both HIC and LMIC, including having peer counselling programs. Variability was also observed for the same indicator between acute and rehabilitation facilities, and a wide range in the total number of indicators met among HIC facilities (acute 59–100%; rehabilitation 36–100%) and among LMIC facilities (acute: 41–82%; rehabilitation: 36–93%) was reported. Conclusions: Results from this international pilot study found that the participating acute and rehabilitation facilities on average adhered to 74% of the selected indicators, suggesting that the structure and processes to provide ideal traumatic spinal cord injury care were broadly available. Recruiting a representative sample of SCI facilities and incorporating regional attributes in future surveys will be helpful to examine factors affecting adherence to indicators.

References Powered by Scopus

The Quality of Care: How Can It Be Assessed?

5169Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

International standards for neurological classification of spinal cord injury

208Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Global burden of traumatic brain and spinal cord injury

197Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Social Determinants of Health Impact Spinal Cord Injury Outcomes in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Meta-Epidemiological Study

2Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Challenges in traumatic spinal cord injury care in developing countries – a scoping review

2Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Traumatic cervical spinal cord injury in southeastern Norway: acute treatment, specialized rehabilitation referral and mortality

0Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Abedi, A., Biering-Sørensen, F., Chhabra, H. S., D’Andréa Greve, J. M., Khan, N. M., Koskinen, E., … Cheng, C. L. (2022). An international survey of the structure and process of care for traumatic spinal cord injury in acute and rehabilitation facilities: lessons learned from a pilot study. BMC Health Services Research, 22(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08847-w

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

Researcher 1

100%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 1

100%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free