You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Barriers to effective discharge planning: a qualitative study investigating the perspectives of frontline healthcare professionals
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, September 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6963-11-242 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Eliza LY Wong, Carrie HK Yam, Annie WL Cheung, Michael CM Leung, Frank WK Chan, Fiona YY Wong, Eng-Kiong Yeoh |
| Abstract |
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Studies have shown that effective discharge planning is one of the key factors related to the quality of inpatient care and unnecessary hospital readmission. The perception and understanding of hospital discharge by health professionals is important in developing effective discharge planning. The aims of this present study were to explore the perceived quality of current hospital discharge from the perspective of health service providers and to identify barriers to effective discharge planning in Hong Kong. METHODS: Focus groups interviews were conducted with different healthcare professionals who were currently responsible for coordinating the discharge planning process in the public hospitals. The discussion covered three main areas: current practice on hospital discharge, barriers to effective hospital discharge, and suggested structures and process for an effective discharge planning system. RESULTS: Participants highlighted that there was no standardized hospital-wide discharge planning and policy-driven approach in public health sector in Hong Kong. Potential barriers included lack of standardized policy-driven discharge planning program, and lack of communication and coordination among different health service providers and patients in both acute and sub-acute care provisions which were identified as mainly systemic issues. Improving the quality of hospital discharge was suggested, including a multidisciplinary approach with clearly identified roles among healthcare professionals. Enhancement of health professionals' communication skills and knowledge of patient psychosocial needs were also suggested. CONCLUSIONS: A systematic approach to develop the structure and key processes of the discharge planning system is critical in ensuring the quality of care and maximizing organization effectiveness. In this study, important views on barriers experienced in hospital discharge were provided. Suggestions for building a comprehensive, system-wide, and policy-driven discharge planning process with clearly identified staff roles were raised. Communication and coordination across various healthcare parties and provisions were also suggested to be a key focus. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 294 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Malaysia | 2 | <1% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Pakistan | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| China | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 284 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 59 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 41 | 14% |
| Researcher | 26 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 21 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 21 | 7% |
| Other | 62 | 21% |
| Unknown | 64 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 91 | 31% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 63 | 21% |
| Social Sciences | 21 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 11 | 4% |
| Psychology | 6 | 2% |
| Other | 32 | 11% |
| Unknown | 70 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 27 February 2013.
All research outputs
#13,858,486
of 22,653,392 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#4,882
of 7,570 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,626
of 131,769 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#51
of 93 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,653,392 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,570 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 131,769 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 93 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.