IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v29y2020i3-4p593-601.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Predictors of unplanned readmission to acute care from inpatient brain injury rehabilitation

Author

Listed:
  • Duncan McKechnie
  • Murray J. Fisher
  • Julie Pryor
  • Rochelle McKechnie

Abstract

Aims and objectives To identify the predictors of unplanned readmission to acute care (RTAC) from inpatient brain injury rehabilitation and to develop a risk prediction model. Background RTAC from inpatient rehabilitation is not uncommon. Individual rehabilitation patient populations require their own body of evidence regarding predictors of RTAC. Design Retrospective cohort study. Methods Adult patients with new onset acquired brain injury admitted to a stand‐alone rehabilitation facility between 1 January 2012–31 December 2018 were included in the study. The main measures were RTAC, sensitivity, specificity, the C‐statistic and Youden's index. This paper is reported using the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. Results Of 383 patients admitted for rehabilitation, 83 (22%) experienced a RTAC; 69 (18%) patients had at least one unplanned RTAC episode. Patients requiring unplanned RTAC were more likely to have lower Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) and Functional Independence Measure (FIM) scores on rehabilitation admission, a higher burden of care on rehabilitation discharge and be discharged to a nonhome residence. Rehabilitation admission GCS and motor FIM were identified as the independent RTAC predictors in multivariate regression modelling. The combined C‐statistic was 0.86. A GCS cut‐off score of ≤14 and motor FIM cut‐off score of ≤40 were identified as optimal, yielding a combined Youden's index of 0.56 (sensitivity = 0.72; specificity = 0.83). Conclusion Patients requiring an unplanned RTAC had a lower functional status on rehabilitation admission. A prediction model for unplanned RTAC has been developed using validated and readily available clinical measures. Relevance to clinical practice The developed RTAC risk prediction model is the first step in preventing unplanned RTAC from inpatient brain injury rehabilitation. Future research should focus on discrete interventions for preventing unplanned RTAC from inpatient brain injury rehabilitation.

Suggested Citation

  • Duncan McKechnie & Murray J. Fisher & Julie Pryor & Rochelle McKechnie, 2020. "Predictors of unplanned readmission to acute care from inpatient brain injury rehabilitation," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(3-4), pages 593-601, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:29:y:2020:i:3-4:p:593-601
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.15118
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.15118
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.15118?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chloe Slocum & Paul Gerrard & Randie Black-Schaffer & Richard Goldstein & Aneesh Singhal & Margaret A DiVita & Colleen M Ryan & Jacqueline Mix & Maulik Purohit & Paulette Niewczyk & Lewis Kazis & Ross, 2015. "Functional Status Predicts Acute Care Readmissions from Inpatient Rehabilitation in the Stroke Population," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(11), pages 1-10, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Maryann Street & Trisha Dunning & Tracey Bucknall & Alison M Hutchinson & Helen Rawson & Anastasia F Hutchinson & Mari Botti & Maxine M Duke & Mohammadreza Mohebbi & Julie Considine, 2020. "Resuscitation status and characteristics and outcomes of patients transferred from subacute care to acute care hospitals: A multi‐site prospective cohort study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(7-8), pages 1302-1311, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:29:y:2020:i:3-4:p:593-601. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.