ArticleBMJ open2025
Descriptive retrospective cross-sectional study of rehabilitation care for poststroke users in Québec during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Consensus Recommendations for Maintaining Neurorehabilitation Quality During Healthcare Crises: A Stakeholder-Informed Mixed Methods Study.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, designated rehabilitation centres were established in the province of Québec, where strict sociosanitary measures such as isolation and mandatory personal protection equipment requirements were followed. This study aimed to describe the impact of the pandemic on rehabilitation care indicators for poststroke users with (COV+) and without (COV-) COVID-19 infection in designated rehabilitation centres compared with those admitted in the previous year (pre-COV).
methodA retrospective analysis of 292 medical files was performed in 3 rehabilitation centres. Demographic characteristics were collected, as well as indicators routinely collected in acute care and rehabilitation such as length of stay (LOS), the Functional Independence Measure and a number of physical/occupational therapy (PT/OT) sessions. Non-parametric statistical tests were used to compare variables among the three groups.
resultsCOV+ users were older than COV- and pre-COV ones (p<0.01) and were more disabled on admission to a rehabilitation centre (p<0.01). They also exhibited longer LOS in acute care prior to rehabilitation (p<0.001) and were more often rehospitalised (p<0.002) during the course of their stay in the rehabilitation centre. Despite longer rehabilitation stays (p<0.001) and more PT/OT sessions, COV+ users remained more disabled at discharge (p<0.002). COV- users showed rehabilitation care indicators resembling the ones of pre-COV despite spending less time in rehabilitation.
conclusionsPatients who had a stroke infected with COVID-19 exhibited greater vulnerability on admission to rehabilitation. They required more care and services during their rehabilitation period. However, this additional support did not enable them to achieve the same level of recovery as COV- and pre-COV users. This underscores the added impact of the disease on already impaired patients and highlights the specific needs of COV+ users undergoing rehabilitation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.