Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. End-of-life care

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Background In the supportive oncology and palliative care settings, rehabilitation interventions are often overlooked and underutilized, despite high levels of functional disability in these patients. As a result, little is known about the utilization or effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions in palliative care populations. Objective To assess the utilization of physical therapy (PT) in a hospital-based palliative care unit, to characterize functional disabilities in patients who received PT, and to identify factors related to functional improvement following a course of PT. Methods Retrospective chart review of 100 patients (mean age 70 years, 97% male) discharged from the Milwaukee Veterans Hospital Palliative Care unit over 15 months. Activities of daily living (ADL) performance scores were recorded on admission, at 2 weeks, and at completion of the PT program and correlated with demographic and disease-related variables. Results Thirty-seven patients received a formal PT assessment, and 18 patients underwent PT. The most common functional disabilities in patients who received PT were deconditioning, pain, imbalance, and focal weakness. Ten patients demonstrated improvement in ADL function at 2 weeks. Six patients completed the course of PT. Albumin was significantly correlated with functional improvement. When controlling for albumin, patients with diagnosis of dementia were more likely to show improvement in functional status than patients without a dementia diagnosis. Conclusion PT assessment and utilization were uncommon in this group. When utilized, PT benefited 56% of patients. Factors related to functional improvement following a PT course were a higher albumin level and a diagnosis of dementia. Prospective trials of PT in palliative care patients are needed to better define response rate and predictors of response.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Montagnini, M., Lodhi, M., & Born, W. (2003). The utilization of physical therapy in a palliative care unit. Journal of palliative medicine. https://doi.org/10.1089/10966210360510073

Vancouver

Montagnini M, Lodhi M, Born W. The utilization of physical therapy in a palliative care unit. Journal of palliative medicine. 2003. doi:10.1089/10966210360510073. PMID: 12710571.

BibTeX

@article{montagnini2003-12710571,
  author  = {Montagnini, M. and Lodhi, M. and Born, W.},
  title   = {{The utilization of physical therapy in a palliative care unit}},
  journal = {Journal of palliative medicine},
  year    = {2003},
  doi     = {10.1089/10966210360510073},
  pmid    = {12710571},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1089/10966210360510073}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 45/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 2 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 26 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 45 of 100. Total 45 of 100.26 of the 58 points we could judge = 45 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 26 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 45 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of palliative medicine)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 0 / 12 No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence 1 / 5 Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 1 / 5 2003 — older than 20 years, still counted
Sample size 2 / 4 100 participants
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited — / 7 No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score
Citations per year — / 5 No citation count or no year — left out of this score
Impact for its field and year — / 6 No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score
Cited by studies here — / 6 Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score
Still being cited — / 4 No yearly citation counts — left out of this score
Senior author's track record — / 4 Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record — / 3 No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multi-centre collaboration — / 3 Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 12710571)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 26 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 26 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 45 out of 100.
Total 45 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.

Related studies in End-of-life care

Also tagged “delirium”

858 studies in the library carry the topic tag “delirium”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 858 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on End-of-life care

See all studies in End-of-life care →