請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/90419
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 董鈺琪 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.advisor | Yu-Chi Tung | en |
dc.contributor.author | 許雅惠 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author | Ya-Hui Hsu | en |
dc.date.accessioned | 2023-10-02T16:07:50Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2023-11-10 | - |
dc.date.copyright | 2023-10-02 | - |
dc.date.issued | 2023 | - |
dc.date.submitted | 2023-08-08 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | 1.Global, regional, and national burden of stroke and its risk factors, 1990-2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet Neurol 2021;20:795-820. doi: 10.1016/s1474-4422(21)00252-0.
2.Go AS, Mozaffarian D, Roger VL, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics--2014 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2014;129:e28-e292. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.0000441139.02102.80. 3.Tsao CW, Aday AW, Almarzooq ZI, et al. Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics-2023 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association. Circulation 2023;147:e93-e621. doi: 10.1161/cir.0000000000001123. 4.Feigin VL, Forouzanfar MH, Krishnamurthi R, et al. Global and regional burden of stroke during 1990-2010: findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet 2014;383:245-54. 5.Buntin MB, Garten AD, Paddock S, Saliba D, Totten M, Escarce JJ. How much is postacute care use affected by its availability? Health services research 2005;40:413-34. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2005.00365.x. 6.Buntin MB. Access to postacute rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2007;88:1488-93. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2007.07.023. 7.中央健康保險署. 台. 急性後期整合照護計畫. Available at: https://www.nhi.gov.tw/Content_List.aspx?n=5A0BB383D955741C&topn=D39E2B72B0BDFA15. Accessed April 25, 2023. 8.Buntin MB, Colla CH, Deb P, Sood N, Escarce JJ. Medicare spending and outcomes after postacute care for stroke and hip fracture. Medical care 2010;48:776-84. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181e359df. 9.Wang H, Sandel ME, Terdiman J, et al. Postacute care and ischemic stroke mortality: findings from an integrated health care system in northern California. PM & R : the journal of injury, function, and rehabilitation 2011;3:686-94. doi: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2011.04.028. 10.Lai CL, Tsai MM, Luo JY, Liao WC, Hsu PS, Chen HY. Post-acute care for stroke - a retrospective cohort study in Taiwan. Patient preference and adherence 2017;11:1309-15. doi: 10.2147/ppa.s136041. 11.Topaz M, Kang Y, Holland DE, Ohta B, Rickard K, Bowles KH. Higher 30-day and 60-day readmissions among patients who refuse post acute care services. Am J Manag Care 2015;21:424-33. 12.Magdon-Ismail Z, Sicklick A, Hedeman R, Bettger JP, Stein J. Selection of Postacute Stroke Rehabilitation Facilities: A Survey of Discharge Planners From the Northeast Cerebrovascular Consortium (NECC) Region. Medicine (Baltimore) 2016;95:e3206. doi: 10.1097/md.0000000000003206. 13.Medicare Cf, Services M. Medicare and Medicaid programs; revisions to requirements for discharge planning for hospitals, critical access hospitals, and home health agencies. Federal Register [serial on the Internet] 2019. 14.Ottenbacher KJ, Graham JE. The state-of-the-science: access to postacute care rehabilitation services. A review. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2007;88:1513-21. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2007.06.761. 15.Medina-Mirapeix F, Oliveira-Sousa S, Sobral-Ferreira M, et al. Continuity of rehabilitation services in post-acute care from the ambulatory outpatients' perspective: a qualitative study. J Rehabil Med 2011;43:58-64. doi: 10.2340/16501977-0638. 16.Medina-Mirapeix F, Oliveira-Sousa SL, Escolar-Reina P, Sobral-Ferreira M, Lillo-Navarro MC, Collins SM. Continuity of care in hospital rehabilitation services: a qualitative insight from inpatients' experience. Brazilian journal of physical therapy 2017;21:85-91. doi: 10.1016/j.bjpt.2017.03.002. 17.Gadbois EA, Tyler DA, Mor V. Selecting a skilled nursing facility for postacute care: Individual and family perspectives. J Am Geriatr Soc 2017;65:2459-65. 18.Gadbois EA, Tyler DA, Shield R, et al. Lost in Transition: a Qualitative Study of Patients Discharged from Hospital to Skilled Nursing Facility. J Gen Intern Med 2018;34:102-9. doi: 10.1007/s11606-018-4695-0. 19.Sefcik JS, Ritter AZ, Flores EJ, et al. Why older adults may decline offers of post-acute care services: A qualitative descriptive study. Geriatr Nurs 2017;38:238-43. doi: 10.1016/j.gerinurse.2016.11.003. 20.Krieger N, Williams DR, Moss NE. Measuring social class in US public health research: concepts, methodologies, and guidelines. Annu Rev Public Health 1997;18:341-78. doi: 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.18.1.341. 21.Cox AM, McKevitt C, Rudd AG, Wolfe CD. Socioeconomic status and stroke. The Lancet Neurology 2006;5:181-8. doi: 10.1016/s1474-4422(06)70351-9. 22.Jakovljevic D, Sarti C, Sivenius J, et al. Socioeconomic differences in the incidence, mortality and prognosis of intracerebral hemorrhage in Finnish Adult Population. The FINMONICA Stroke Register. Neuroepidemiology 2001;20:85-90. doi: 54765. 23.Kapral MK, Wang H, Mamdani M, Tu JV. Effect of socioeconomic status on treatment and mortality after stroke. Stroke 2002;33:268-73. 24.Langagergaard V, Palnum KH, Mehnert F, et al. Socioeconomic differences in quality of care and clinical outcome after stroke: a nationwide population-based study. Stroke 2011;42:2896-902. doi: 10.1161/strokeaha.110.611871. 25.Arrich J, Lalouschek W, Mullner M. Influence of socioeconomic status on mortality after stroke: retrospective cohort study. Stroke 2005;36:310-4. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000152962.92621.b5. 26.Yan H, Liu B, Meng G, et al. The influence of individual socioeconomic status on the clinical outcomes in ischemic stroke patients with different neighborhood status in Shanghai, China. International journal of medical sciences 2017;14:86-96. doi: 10.7150/ijms.17241. 27.Shin J, Choi Y, Kim SW, Lee SG, Park EC. Cross-level interaction between individual socioeconomic status and regional deprivation on overall survival after onset of ischemic stroke: National health insurance cohort sample data from 2002 to 2013. J Epidemiol 2017;27:381-8. doi: 10.1016/j.je.2016.08.020. 28.Li C, Hedblad B, Rosvall M, Buchwald F, Khan FA, Engstrom G. Stroke incidence, recurrence, and case-fatality in relation to socioeconomic position: a population-based study of middle-aged Swedish men and women. Stroke 2008;39:2191-6. doi: 10.1161/strokeaha.107.507756. 29.Mohan KM, Crichton SL, Grieve AP, Rudd AG, Wolfe CD, Heuschmann PU. Frequency and predictors for the risk of stroke recurrence up to 10 years after stroke: the South London Stroke Register. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2009;80:1012-8. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.2008.170456. 30.Pennlert J, Asplund K, Glader EL, Norrving B, Eriksson M. Socioeconomic Status and the Risk of Stroke Recurrence: Persisting Gaps Observed in a Nationwide Swedish Study 2001 to 2012. Stroke 2017;48:1518-23. doi: 10.1161/strokeaha.116.015643. 31.Aslanyan S, Weir CJ, Lees KR, Reid JL, McInnes GT. Effect of area-based deprivation on the severity, subtype, and outcome of ischemic stroke. Stroke 2003;34:2623-8. doi: 10.1161/01.str.0000097610.12803.d7. 32.Hu J, Gonsahn MD, Nerenz DR. Socioeconomic status and readmissions: evidence from an urban teaching hospital. Health Aff (Millwood) 2014;33:778-85. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2013.0816. 33.Hankey GJ, Spiesser J, Hakimi Z, Bego G, Carita P, Gabriel S. Rate, degree, and predictors of recovery from disability following ischemic stroke. Neurology 2007;68:1583-7. doi: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000260967.77422.97. 34.Hsieh CY, Huang HC, Wu DP, Li CY, Chiu MJ, Sung SF. Impact of rehabilitation intensity on mortality risk after stroke. Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation 2017. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2017.10.011. 35.Chang KC, Hung JW, Lee HC, et al. Rehabilitation Reduced Readmission and Mortality Risks in Patients With Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack: A Population-based Study. Med Care 2018;56:290-8. doi: 10.1097/mlr.0000000000000888. 36.Belleudi V, Sciattella P, Agabiti N, et al. Socioeconomic differences in one-year survival after ischemic stroke: the effect of acute and post-acute care-pathways in a cohort study. BMC Public Health 2016;16:408. doi: 10.1186/s12889-016-3019-8. 37.Hyldgård VB, Søgaard R, Valentin JB, Lange T, Damgaard D, Johnsen SP. Is the socioeconomic inequality in stroke prognosis changing over time and does quality of care play a role? European stroke journal 2023;8:351-60. doi: 10.1177/23969873221146591. 38.WHO. Stroke, Cerebrovascular accident. Health topics. Available at: http://www.who.int/topics/cerebrovascular_accident/en/. Accessed November 08, 2017. 39.Hatano S. Experience from a multicentre stroke register: a preliminary report. Bull World Health Organ 1976;54:541-53. 40.Aho K, Harmsen P, Hatano S, Marquardsen J, Smirnov VE, Strasser T. Cerebrovascular disease in the community: results of a WHO collaborative study. Bull World Health Organ 1980;58:113-30. 41.The World Health Organization MONICA Project (monitoring trends and determinants in cardiovascular disease): a major international collaboration. WHO MONICA Project Principal Investigators. Journal of clinical epidemiology 1988;41:105-14. 42.Hsieh FI, Lien LM, Chen ST, et al. Get With the Guidelines-Stroke performance indicators: surveillance of stroke care in the Taiwan Stroke Registry: Get With the Guidelines-Stroke in Taiwan. Circulation 2010;122:1116-23. doi: 10.1161/circulationaha.110.936526. 43.Adams HP, Jr., Bendixen BH, Kappelle LJ, et al. Classification of subtype of acute ischemic stroke. Definitions for use in a multicenter clinical trial. TOAST. Trial of Org 10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment. Stroke 1993;24:35-41. 44.Koton S, Schneider AL, Rosamond WD, et al. Stroke incidence and mortality trends in US communities, 1987 to 2011. JAMA 2014;312:259-68. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.7692. 45.衛生福利部.統計處. 衛生福利部110年死因統計結果分析. Available at: https://dep.mohw.gov.tw/DOS/lp-5069-113-xCat-y110.html. Accessed APRIL 25, 2023. 46.Lee M, Wu YL, Ovbiagele B. Trends in Incident and Recurrent Rates of First-Ever Ischemic Stroke in Taiwan between 2000 and 2011. Journal of stroke 2016;18:60-5. doi: 10.5853/jos.2015.01326. 47.Venketasubramanian N, Yoon BW, Pandian J, Navarro JC. Stroke Epidemiology in South, East, and South-East Asia: A Review. Journal of stroke 2017. doi: 10.5853/jos.2017.00234.e1. 48.Lai SL, Weng HH, Lee M, Hsiao MC, Lin LJ, Huang WY. Risk factors and subtype analysis of acute ischemic stroke. Eur Neurol 2008;60:230-6. doi: 10.1159/000151698. 49.Hsieh FI, Chiou HY. Stroke: morbidity, risk factors, and care in taiwan. Journal of stroke 2014;16:59-64. doi: 10.5853/jos.2014.16.2.59. 50.Lewington S, Clarke R, Qizilbash N, Peto R, Collins R. Age-specific relevance of usual blood pressure to vascular mortality: a meta-analysis of individual data for one million adults in 61 prospective studies. Lancet 2002;360:1903-13. 51.Kengne AP, Patel A, Barzi F, et al. Systolic blood pressure, diabetes and the risk of cardiovascular diseases in the Asia-Pacific region. J Hypertens 2007;25:1205-13. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0b013e3280dce59e. 52.Fox CS, Coady S, Sorlie PD, et al. Increasing cardiovascular disease burden due to diabetes mellitus: the Framingham Heart Study. Circulation 2007;115:1544-50. doi: 10.1161/circulationaha.106.658948. 53.Patel A, MacMahon S, Chalmers J, et al. Intensive blood glucose control and vascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2008;358:2560-72. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0802987. 54.Kearney PM, Blackwell L, Collins R, et al. Efficacy of cholesterol-lowering therapy in 18,686 people with diabetes in 14 randomised trials of statins: a meta-analysis. Lancet 2008;371:117-25. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(08)60104-x. 55.WHO. Appropriate body-mass index for Asian populations and its implications for policy and intervention strategies. Lancet 2004;363:157-63. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(03)15268-3. 56.WHO. World Health Organization.Global Database on Body Mass Index.BMI classification. Available at: http://apps.who.int/bmi/index.jsp?introPage=intro_3.html. Accessed November 08, 2017. 57.Chen HJ, Bai CH, Yeh WT, Chiu HC, Pan WH. Influence of metabolic syndrome and general obesity on the risk of ischemic stroke. Stroke 2006;37:1060-4. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000206458.58142.f3. 58.Chien KL, Su TC, Hsu HC, et al. Atrial fibrillation prevalence, incidence and risk of stroke and all-cause death among Chinese. Int J Cardiol 2010;139:173-80. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2008.10.045. 59.Li LH, Sheng CS, Hu BC, et al. The prevalence, incidence, management and risks of atrial fibrillation in an elderly Chinese population: a prospective study. BMC Cardiovasc Disord 2015;15:31. doi: 10.1186/s12872-015-0023-3. 60.Chao TF, Liu CJ, Chen SJ, et al. Atrial fibrillation and the risk of ischemic stroke: does it still matter in patients with a CHA2DS2-VASc score of 0 or 1? Stroke 2012;43:2551-5. doi: 10.1161/strokeaha.112.667865. 61.Topcuoglu MA, Saka E, Silverman SB, Schwamm LH, Singhal AB. Recrudescence of Deficits After Stroke: Clinical and Imaging Phenotype, Triggers, and Risk Factors. JAMA neurology 2017;74:1048-55. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2017.1668. 62.Paul SL, Thrift AG, Donnan GA. Smoking as a crucial independent determinant of stroke. Tob Induc Dis 2004;2:67-80. doi: 10.1186/1617-9625-2-2-67. 63.Shah RS, Cole JW. Smoking and stroke: the more you smoke the more you stroke. Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther 2010;8:917-32. doi: 10.1586/erc.10.56. 64.Reynolds K, Lewis B, Nolen JD, Kinney GL, Sathya B, He J. Alcohol consumption and risk of stroke: a meta-analysis. JAMA 2003;289:579-88. 65.Feigin VL, Norrving B, Mensah GA. Global Burden of Stroke. Circ Res 2017;120:439-48. doi: 10.1161/circresaha.116.308413. 66.台灣腦中風學會. 腦中風 Guideline. Available at: http://www.stroke.org.tw/guideline/guideline_index.asp. Accessed November 08, 2017. 67.NINDS. Tissue plasminogen activator for acute ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med 1995;333:1581-7. doi: 10.1056/nejm199512143332401. 68.Hacke W, Kaste M, Bluhmki E, et al. Thrombolysis with alteplase 3 to 4.5 hours after acute ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med 2008;359:1317-29. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0804656. 69.Powers WJ, Derdeyn CP, Biller J, et al. 2015 American Heart Association/American Stroke Association Focused Update of the 2013 Guidelines for the Early Management of Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke Regarding Endovascular Treatment: A Guideline for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke 2015;46:3020-35. doi: 10.1161/str.0000000000000074. 70.Berkhemer OA, Fransen PS, Beumer D, et al. A randomized trial of intraarterial treatment for acute ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med 2015;372:11-20. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1411587. 71.Campbell BC, Mitchell PJ, Kleinig TJ, et al. Endovascular therapy for ischemic stroke with perfusion-imaging selection. N Engl J Med 2015;372:1009-18. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1414792. 72.Goyal M, Demchuk AM, Menon BK, et al. Randomized assessment of rapid endovascular treatment of ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med 2015;372:1019-30. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1414905. 73.Jovin TG, Chamorro A, Cobo E, et al. Thrombectomy within 8 hours after symptom onset in ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med 2015;372:2296-306. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1503780. 74.Mozaffarian D, Benjamin EJ, Go AS, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics--2015 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2015;131:e29-322. doi: 10.1161/cir.0000000000000152. 75.Bettger JP, Thomas L, Liang L, et al. Hospital Variation in Functional Recovery After Stroke. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2017;10. doi: 10.1161/circoutcomes.115.002391. 76.Chang KC, Tseng MC. Costs of acute care of first-ever ischemic stroke in Taiwan. Stroke 2003;34:e219-21. doi: 10.1161/01.str.0000095565.12945.18. 77.Lee HC, Chang KC, Huang YC, et al. Readmission, mortality, and first-year medical costs after stroke. Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA 2013;76:703-14. doi: 10.1016/j.jcma.2013.08.003. 78.Huang YC, Hu CJ, Lee TH, et al. The impact factors on the cost and length of stay among acute ischemic stroke. Journal of stroke and cerebrovascular diseases : the official journal of National Stroke Association 2013;22:e152-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2012.10.014. 79.Nations. U. Universal declaration of human rights (Article 22 and Article 2). Available at: http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/index.html. Accessed November 23, 2017. 80.WHO. Constitution of the World Health Organization: Principles. Available at: http://www.who.int/about/mission/en/. Accessed November 23, 2017. 81.WHO. Social determinants of health. Available at: http://www.who.int/social_determinants/thecommission/finalreport/key_concepts/en/. Accessed November 23, 2017. 82.Whitehead M. The concepts and principles of equity and health. Int J Health Serv 1992;22:429-45. doi: 10.2190/986l-lhq6-2vte-yrrn. 83.WHO. A conceptual framework for action on the social determinants of health. 2010. 84.Adler NE, Ostrove JM. Socioeconomic status and health: what we know and what we don't. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1999;896:3-15. 85.Adler NE, Newman K. Socioeconomic disparities in health: pathways and policies. Health Aff (Millwood) 2002;21:60-76. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.21.2.60. 86.Skalicka V, Ringdal K, Witvliet MI. Socioeconomic inequalities in mortality and repeated measurement of explanatory risk factors in a 25 years follow-up. PLoS One 2015;10:e0124690. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0124690. 87.Signorello LB, Cohen SS, Williams DR, Munro HM, Hargreaves MK, Blot WJ. Socioeconomic status, race, and mortality: a prospective cohort study. Am J Public Health 2014;104:e98-e107. doi: 10.2105/ajph.2014.302156. 88.Wu CC, Chang CM, Hsu TW, et al. The effect of individual and neighborhood socioeconomic status on esophageal cancer survival in working-age patients in Taiwan. Medicine (Baltimore) 2016;95:e4140. doi: 10.1097/md.0000000000004140. 89.國家發展委員會. 零歲平均餘命. Available at: https://pop-proj.ndc.gov.tw/dataSearch3.aspx?r=2&uid=2104&pid=59. Accessed APRIL 25, 2023. 90.衛生服利部國民健康署. 臺灣健康不平等報告. Available at: https://www.hpa.gov.tw/Pages/Detail.aspx?nodeid=61&pid=7192. Accessed November 23, 2017. 91.Geyer S, Hemstrom O, Peter R, Vagero D. Education, income, and occupational class cannot be used interchangeably in social epidemiology. Empirical evidence against a common practice. J Epidemiol Community Health 2006;60:804-10. doi: 10.1136/jech.2005.041319. 92.Marshall IJ, Wang Y, Crichton S, McKevitt C, Rudd AG, Wolfe CD. The effects of socioeconomic status on stroke risk and outcomes. The Lancet Neurology 2015;14:1206-18. doi: 10.1016/s1474-4422(15)00200-8. 93.Paton JM, Fahy MA, Livingston GA. Delayed discharge--a solvable problem? The place of intermediate care in mental health care of older people. Aging & mental health 2004;8:34-9. doi: 10.1080/13607860310001613310. 94.Griffiths P, Edwards M, Forbes A, Harris R. Post-acute intermediate care in nursing-led units: a systematic review of effectiveness. Int J Nurs Stud 2005;42:107-16. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2004.07.010. 95.陳亮恭, 黃信彰. 中期照護: 架構老年健康服務的關鍵. 台灣老年醫學雜誌 2008. 96.World Health Organization. Regional Office for E, European Observatory on Health S, Policies, Rechel B, Maresso A, van G. Health Systems in Transition: template for authors 2019. Copenhagen: World Health Organization. Regional Office for Europe, 2019;80 p. 97.戴桂英, 吳淑瓊, 江東亮. 美國老人醫療保險急性後期照護的發展. 台灣公共衛生雜誌 2006;25:323-9. doi: 10.6288/tjph2006-25-05-01. 98.Mayes R. The origins, development, and passage of Medicare's revolutionary prospective payment system. J Hist Med Allied Sci 2007;62:21-55. doi: 10.1093/jhmas/jrj038. 99.Goldfield N. The evolution of diagnosis-related groups (DRGs): from its beginnings in case-mix and resource use theory, to its implementation for payment and now for its current utilization for quality within and outside the hospital. Qual Manag Health Care 2010;19:3-16. doi: 10.1097/QMH.0b013e3181ccbcc3. 100.Freiman MP, Ellis RP, McGuire TG. Provider response to Medicare's PPS: reductions in length of stay for psychiatric patients treated in scatter beds. Inquiry 1989;26:192-201. 101.Yin J, Luras H, Hagen TP, Dahl FA. The effect of activity-based financing on hospital length of stay for elderly patients suffering from heart diseases in Norway. BMC Health Serv Res 2013;13:172. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-13-172. 102.Biorn E, Hagen TP, Iversen T, Magnussen J. How different are hospitals' responses to a financial reform? The impact on efficiency of activity-based financing. Health care management science 2010;13:1-16. 103.Cutler DM. The incidence of adverse medical outcomes under prospective payments. National Bureau of Economic Research, 1993. 104.Palmer KS, Agoritsas T, Martin D, et al. Activity-based funding of hospitals and its impact on mortality, readmission, discharge destination, severity of illness, and volume of care: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2014;9:e109975. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0109975. 105.吳肖琪. 急性醫療與慢性照護的橋樑-亞急性與急性後期照護. 護理雜誌 2008;55:5-10. doi: 10.6224/jn.55.4.5. 106.Gage B. Impact of the BBA on post-acute utilization. Health care financing review 1999;20:103-26. 107.吳冠穎, 吳肖琪, 洪燕妮, 吳君誠, 林麗嬋, 胡漢華. 台灣腦中風病人急性後期照護需要之探討. 台灣公共衛生雜誌 2012;31:251-62. doi: 10.6288/tjph2012-31-03-05. 108.Freburger JK, Holmes GM, Ku LJ, Cutchin MP, Heatwole-Shank K, Edwards LJ. Disparities in postacute rehabilitation care for stroke: an analysis of the state inpatient databases. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2011;92:1220-9. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2011.03.019. 109.Kane RL, Lin WC, Blewett LA. Geographic variation in the use of post-acute care. Health services research 2002;37:667-82. 110.Liu K, Wissoker D, Rimes C. Determinants and costs of Medicare post-acute care provided by SNFs and HHAs. Inquiry 1998;35:49-61. 111.Bronskill SE, Normand SL, McNeil BJ. Post-acute service use following acute myocardial infarction in the elderly. Health Care Financ Rev 2002;24:77-93. 112.Jakovljevic D, Sarti C, Sivenius J, et al. Socioeconomic status and ischemic stroke: The FINMONICA Stroke Register. Stroke 2001;32:1492-8. 113.van den Bos GA, Smits JP, Westert GP, van Straten A. Socioeconomic variations in the course of stroke: unequal health outcomes, equal care? J Epidemiol Community Health 2002;56:943-8. 114.Avendano M, Glymour MM. Stroke disparities in older Americans: is wealth a more powerful indicator of risk than income and education? Stroke 2008;39:1533-40. doi: 10.1161/strokeaha.107.490383. 115.Chen R, Crichton S, McKevitt C, Rudd AG, Sheldenkar A, Wolfe CD. Association between socioeconomic deprivation and functional impairment after stroke: the South London Stroke Register. Stroke 2015;46:800-5. doi: 10.1161/strokeaha.114.007569. 116.McKevitt C, Coshall C, Tilling K, Wolfe C. Are there inequalities in the provision of stroke care? Analysis of an inner-city stroke register. Stroke 2005;36:315-20. doi: 10.1161/01.str.0000152332.32267.19. 117.Kerr GD, Higgins P, Walters M, et al. Socioeconomic status and transient ischaemic attack/stroke: a prospective observational study. Cerebrovasc Dis 2011;31:130-7. doi: 10.1159/000321732. 118.Grube MM, Koennecke HC, Walter G, et al. Association between socioeconomic status and functional impairment 3 months after ischemic stroke: the Berlin Stroke Register. Stroke 2012;43:3325-30. doi: 10.1161/strokeaha.112.669580. 119.Bettger JP, Zhao X, Bushnell C, et al. The association between socioeconomic status and disability after stroke: findings from the Adherence eValuation After Ischemic stroke Longitudinal (AVAIL) registry. BMC public health 2014;14:281. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-14-281. 120.Andersen KK, Dalton SO, Steding-Jessen M, Olsen TS. Socioeconomic position and survival after stroke in Denmark 2003 to 2012: nationwide hospital-based study. Stroke 2014;45:3556-60. doi: 10.1161/strokeaha.114.007046. 121.Lindmark A, Glader EL, Asplund K, Norrving B, Eriksson M. Socioeconomic disparities in stroke case fatality--Observations from Riks-Stroke, the Swedish stroke register. International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society 2014;9:429-36. doi: 10.1111/ijs.12133. 122.Pan Y, Song T, Chen R, et al. Socioeconomic deprivation and mortality in people after ischemic stroke: The China National Stroke Registry. International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society 2016;11:557-64. doi: 10.1177/1747493016641121. 123.Pan Y, Chen R, Li Z, et al. Socioeconomic Status and the Quality of Acute Stroke Care: The China National Stroke Registry. Stroke 2016;47:2836-42. doi: 10.1161/strokeaha.116.013292. 124.Trygged S, Ahacic K, Kareholt I. Income and education as predictors of return to working life among younger stroke patients. BMC Public Health 2011;11:742. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-11-742. 125.Stafford M, Marmot M. Neighbourhood deprivation and health: does it affect us all equally? Int J Epidemiol 2003;32:357-66. 126.Kapral MK, Fang J, Chan C, et al. Neighborhood income and stroke care and outcomes. Neurology 2012;79:1200-7. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e31826aac9b. 127.Huang K, Khan N, Kwan A, Fang J, Yun L, Kapral MK. Socioeconomic status and care after stroke: results from the Registry of the Canadian Stroke Network. Stroke 2013;44:477-82. doi: 10.1161/strokeaha.112.672121. 128.Agarwal S, Menon V, Jaber WA. Outcomes after acute ischemic stroke in the United States: does residential ZIP code matter? Journal of the American Heart Association 2015;4:e001629. doi: 10.1161/jaha.114.001629. 129.Jaja BN, Saposnik G, Nisenbaum R, et al. Effect of socioeconomic status on inpatient mortality and use of postacute care after subarachnoid hemorrhage. Stroke 2013;44:2842-7. doi: 10.1161/strokeaha.113.001368. 130.Baron RM, Kenny DA. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J Pers Soc Psychol 1986;51:1173-82. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173. 131.Sobel ME. Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. Sociological methodology 1982;13:290-312. 132.Gilbert DT, Fiske ST, Lindzey G. The handbook of social psychology: Oxford University Press, 1998. 133.Tung YC, Chang GM, Chien KL, Tu YK. The relationships among physician and hospital volume, processes, and outcomes of care for acute myocardial infarction. Med Care 2014;52:519-27. doi: 10.1097/mlr.0000000000000132. 134.Cesaroni G, Agabiti N, Forastiere F, Perucci CA. Socioeconomic differences in stroke incidence and prognosis under a universal healthcare system. Stroke 2009;40:2812-9. doi: 10.1161/strokeaha.108.542944. 135.Hanchate AD, Schwamm LH, Huang W, Hylek EM. Comparison of ischemic stroke outcomes and patient and hospital characteristics by race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status. Stroke 2013;44:469-76. doi: 10.1161/strokeaha.112.669341. 136.Saposnik G, Jeerakathil T, Selchen D, Baibergenova A, Hachinski V, Kapral MK. Socioeconomic status, hospital volume, and stroke fatality in Canada. Stroke 2008;39:3360-6. doi: 10.1161/strokeaha.108.521344. 137.Howard G, Kleindorfer DO, Cushman M, et al. Contributors to the Excess Stroke Mortality in Rural Areas in the United States. Stroke 2017;48:1773-8. doi: 10.1161/strokeaha.117.017089. 138.Institutes NHR. National Health Insurance Research Database. Available at: https://nhird.nhri.edu.tw/en/index.html. Accessed March 31, 2023. 139.Ekker MS, Verhoeven JI, Vaartjes I, Jolink WMT, Klijn CJM, de Leeuw F-E. Association of Stroke Among Adults Aged 18 to 49 Years With Long-term Mortality. JAMA 2019;321:2113-23. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.6560. 140.Liu CY, Hung YT, Chuang YL. Incorporating development stratification of Taiwan townships into sampling design of large scale health interview survey (in Chinese). J Health Manage 2006;4:1-22. doi: 10.29805/jhm.200606.0001. 141.Lin YH, Chen YC, Tseng YH, et al. Trend of urban-rural disparities in hospice utilization in Taiwan. PLoS One 2013;8:e62492. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0062492. 142.Freburger JK, Li D, Johnson AM, Fraher EP. Physical and Occupational Therapy From the Acute to Community Setting After Stroke: Predictors of Use, Continuity of Care, and Timeliness of Care. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2018;99:1077-89.e7. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2017.03.007. 143.Man S, Bruckman D, Tang AS, Uchino K, Schold JD. The Association of Socioeconomic Status and Discharge Destination with 30-Day Readmission after Ischemic Stroke. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 2021;30:106146. doi: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2021.106146. 144.Svendsen ML, Gadager BB, Stapelfeldt CM, Ravn MB, Palner SM, Maribo T. To what extend is socioeconomic status associated with not taking up and dropout from cardiac rehabilitation: a population-based follow-up study. BMJ open 2022;12:e060924. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-060924. 145.Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Ciol MA. Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases. J Clin Epidemiol 1992;45:613-9. doi: 10.1016/0895-4356(92)90133-8. 146.Hubbard AE, Ahern J, Fleischer NL, et al. To GEE or not to GEE: comparing population average and mixed models for estimating the associations between neighborhood risk factors and health. Epidemiology 2010;21:467-74. doi: 10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181caeb90. 147.邱翰憶, 鄭守夏, 董鈺琪. 心臟衰竭病人出院後照護連續性及就醫機構層級與照護結果及費用之相關性. Taiwan Journal of Publich Health/Taiwan Gong Gong Wei Sheng Za Zhi 2016;35. 148.Boyce C, Neale P. Conducting in-depth interviews: A guide for designing and conducting in-depth interviews for evaluation input. Available at: https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/33661461/m_e_tool_series_indepth_interviews-with-cover-page-v2.pdf?Expires=1647573598&Signature=EeMYhYDFmZMBvShVO9VGV8VeB90C~jbmlbQGlb4LI7P22giySbYccEk8NVEBbCO86NGx~wGSAA7g4dNQXWc2Me18tlkntpn~c7vfTYfmQhmoGQHXhT8hnn1UABeV9nRY6IgW2Xr63Zz5x~BRYcJUNjIhSfhCYX5aSfV3MK5lrhwbgSdMPE5H~0It1LJVsGYYUeKR5JGLkLm4Aw06xy8TRx9o65iktAIr~~c9H-NNfX~uFY450KCkaLGsspRYZq38aCjG7LHbcbmwfCbsW~j1TiR-mX5YSTrQfkupYu9sEDlp7ya7BYtZPHNK9lXEbOe3DVWIXxFtnUnEDIRJeqXpCA__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAJLOHF5GGSLRBV4ZA. 149.Milena ZR, Dainora G, Alin S. Qualitative research methods: A comparison between focus-group and in-depth interview. Annals of the University of Oradea, Economic Science Series 2008;17:1279-83. 150.McIntosh MJ, Morse JM. Situating and constructing diversity in semi-structured interviews. Global qualitative nursing research 2015;2:2333393615597674. 151.Hennink MM, Kaiser BN, Marconi VC. Code saturation versus meaning saturation: how many interviews are enough? Qualitative health research 2017;27:591-608. 152.Graneheim UH, Lundman B. Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse education today 2004;24:105-12. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.001. 153.Elo S, Kyngäs H. The qualitative content analysis process. J Adv Nurs 2008;62:107-15. 154.Wolf S, Holm SE, Ingwersen T, et al. Pre-stroke socioeconomic status predicts upper limb motor recovery after inpatient neurorehabilitation. Ann Med 2022;54:1265-76. doi: 10.1080/07853890.2022.2059557. 155.Kavga A, Kalemikerakis I, Konstantinidis T, et al. Factors associated with social support for family members who care for stroke survivors. AIMS public health 2022;9:142-54. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2022011. 156.Wang SY, Tan ASL, Claggett B, et al. Longitudinal Associations Between Income Changes and Incident Cardiovascular Disease: The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study. JAMA cardiology 2019;4:1203-12. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2019.3788. 157.Freburger JK, Li D, Fraher EP. Community Use of Physical and Occupational Therapy After Stroke and Risk of Hospital Readmission. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2018;99:26-34.e5. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2017.07.011. 158.Andrews AW, Li D, Freburger JK. Association of Rehabilitation Intensity for Stroke and Risk of Hospital Readmission. Physical therapy 2015;95:1660-7. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20140610. 159.Krishnan S, Hay CC, Pappadis MR, Deutsch A, Reistetter TA. Stroke Survivors' Perspectives on Post-Acute Rehabilitation Options, Goals, Satisfaction, and Transition to Home. J Neurol Phys Ther 2019;43:160-7. doi: 10.1097/npt.0000000000000281. 160.Gadbois EA, Tyler DA, Mor V. Selecting a Skilled Nursing Facility for Postacute Care: Individual and Family Perspectives. J Am Geriatr Soc 2017;65:2459-65. doi: 10.1111/jgs.14988. 161.Pesis-Katz I, Phelps CE, Temkin-Greener H, Spector WD, Veazie P, Mukamel DB. Making difficult decisions: the role of quality of care in choosing a nursing home. Am J Public Health 2013;103:e31-7. doi: 10.2105/ajph.2013.301243. 162.Hefele JG, Acevedo A, Nsiah-Jefferson L, et al. Choosing a Nursing Home: What Do Consumers Want to Know, and Do Preferences Vary across Race/Ethnicity? Health services research 2016;51 Suppl 2:1167-87. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12457. 163.Gregory P, Edwards L, Faurot K, Williams SW, Felix AC. Patient preferences for stroke rehabilitation. Top Stroke Rehabil 2015;17:394-400. doi: org/10.1310/tsr1705-394. 164.Ayele R, Jones J, Ladebue A, et al. Perceived Costs of Care Influence Post-Acute Care Choices by Clinicians, Patients, and Caregivers. J Am Geriatr Soc 2019;67:703-10. doi: 10.1111/jgs.15768. 165.Koton S, Sang Y, Schneider ALC, Rosamond WD, Gottesman RF, Coresh J. Trends in Stroke Incidence Rates in Older US Adults: An Update From the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Cohort Study. JAMA neurology 2020;77:109-13. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2019.3258. | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/90419 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 研究背景與目的:腦中風是世界第二大死亡原因,也是導致成年人殘疾,造成失能最常見的原因,復健是增進功能恢復主要的關鍵因素。過去一些研究發現腦中風病人社會經濟地位(socioeconomic status, SES)對照護結果有影響,研究結果大都支持社經地位較高的腦中風病人,照護結果是優於低社經地位者。然而,社經地位對腦中風病人照護結果之影響機轉,仍舊缺乏強而有力的證據。同時有關急性後期照護(post acute care, PAC)與照護結果之研究結果發現PAC可降低腦中風病人死亡風險,過去研究也發現有約30%的病人拒絕接受PAC服務,針對腦中風病人及家屬為中心的觀點探討選擇PAC模式(包含住院復健醫院、技術性護理機構、居家護理及門診復健等)的因素研究闕如。因此,本研究是以回溯性世代研究為研究設計,利用代表全國性人口之資料庫,探討社經地位對於腦中風病人30天再住院之影響,及急性後期照護是否為30天再住院之中介因素。另外透過質性深度訪談以探討腦中風病人及其家屬對於PAC服務及模式的選擇存在那些影響因素。
研究方法:以回溯性世代研究,透過衛生福利部衛生福利資料科學中心(Health and Welfare Data Science Center, HWDC),以2016年32,822位初次缺血性中風住院之出院病人進行追蹤分析。使用廣義估計方程式(Generalized Estimating Equation, GEE)進行多變項迴歸分析,在控制病人特質、住院復健、住院醫療利用及醫院特質後,探討缺血性腦中風病人社經地位、急性後期復健與30天再住院率之間的關係。另外,使用半結構式訪談大綱針對台灣北中南4家醫院之21位腦中風病人與家屬進行深度訪談,並以內容分析作為質性研究分析的方法以決定腦中風病人及家屬選擇PAC的影響因素。 研究結果:以具全國人口代表性資料進行分析研究結果發現,低個人社經地位及居住在低社經地位地區的缺血性腦中風病人,出院後接受復健的機率較低(低收入:OR= 0.77; 95% CI= 0.63-0.94, P =0.012;鄉村: OR= 0.88; 95% CI= 0.82-0.94, P <0.001);並且低個人社經地位及出院後未接受復健之缺血性腦中風病人其30天再住院的風險較高(低收入:OR= 1.28; 95% CI= 1.04-1.59, P =0.020; 急性後期復健:OR= 0.46; 95% CI= 0.41-0.52, P <0.001));低社經地位之缺血性腦中風病人可以透過急性後期復健降低30天再住院的風險,急性後期復健對於社經地位與30天再住院之間的影響具有部分中介效果。而以質性訪談確認腦中風病人及家屬選擇PAC的影響因素之研究指出,專業醫療人員的建議、健康照護資源可近性、照護連續性及協調性、病人與親友的意願及過去經驗、經濟因素是影響腦中風病人選擇PAC的模式的5個重要因素。 結論:根據本研究結果,缺血性腦中風病人在急性期治療後,積極接受復健治療確實可以改善病人再住院的風險。專業醫療人員的建議、醫療照護資源可近性、照護連續性及協調性、病人與家屬的意願及過去經驗、經濟因素是影響腦中風病人選擇PAC的模式的5個重要因素。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | Objectives: Stroke is the second leading cause of death in the world, and it is also the leading cause of long-term disability in adults. For surviving stroke patients, follow-up rehabilitation therapy is the key to restoring lost functions. In the past, some studies have found that the socioeconomic status (SES) of stroke patients has an impact on the outcome of care, and most of the findings support that stroke patients with higher SES have better outcomes than those with lower SES. However, there is still a lack of strong evidence on the effect of SES on the outcome of stroke patients. Previous studies on PAC and care outcomes have found that PAC reduced mortality risk, and there are nearly one-third of the elderly in-patients had declined them. However, there has been limited investigation on the factors of stroke patients in choosing PAC service (inpatient rehabilitation hospital, skilled nursing facility, home health, and outpatient rehabilitation) using a person-centered approach. Therefore, this study was designed as a retrospective intergenerational study to examine the effect of socioeconomic status on 30-day readmission of stroke patients and whether post-acute care is a mediator of 30-day readmission using a national population-based database. In addition, this study conducted in-depth interviews to explore the factors that influence the choice of a post-acute care (PAC) model among stroke patients and their families.
Methods: A retrospective generational study was conducted through the Health and Welfare Data Science Center (HWDC) of the Ministry of Health and Welfare (MOHW) to follow up on 32,822 discharged patients who were hospitalized with initial ischemic stroke in 2016. Multivariate regression analyses were conducted using the Generalized Estimating Equation (GEE) to examine the relationship between socioeconomic status, post-acute care, and 30-day readmission rates for ischemic stroke patients, and controlling for patient characteristics, inpatient rehab, inpatient healthcare utilization, and hospital characteristics. In addition, we conducted semi-structured, in-depth interviews with 21 stroke patients and their families at four hospitals in Taiwan. Content analysis was used in this qualitative study. Results: Analysis of nationally representative data found that ischemic stroke patients with low individual SES and those living in low neighborhood SES areas had a lower chance of receiving post- acute rehabilitation (low income: OR= 0.77; 95% CI= 0.63-0.94, P = 0.012; rural: OR= 0.88; 95% CI= 0.82-0.94, P < 0.001); and ischemic stroke patients with low individual SES and no post-discharge rehabilitation had a higher risk of 30-day readmission (low-income: OR= 1.28; 95% CI= 1.04-1.59, P = 0.020; post-acute rehabilitation: OR= 0.46; 95% CI= 0.41-0.52, P < 0.001)); Patients with ischemic stroke of low individual SES had a reduced risk of 30-day readmission through post-acute rehabilitation, which the partially mediated effect of SES on 30-day readmission. In a study using qualitative interviews to identify the factors influencing the choice of PAC by stroke patients and their families, and results revealed five main factors that influence respondents’ choice of PAC: (1) medical professionals’ suggestions, (2) health care accessibility, (3) continuity and coordination of care, (4) willingness and prior experience of patients and their relatives and friends, and (5) economic factors. Conclusion: According to the results of this study, positive rehabilitation of ischemic stroke patients after acute treatment can indeed improve the risk of readmission, and the advice of medical professionals, the accessibility of health care resources, the continuity and coordination of care, the willingness and past experience of patients and their relatives and friends, and economic factors were five important factors that affected the selection of PAC models for stroke patients. Follow-up studies should extensively explore the impacts on different cases based on the five main factors identified in this study. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Submitted by admin ntu (admin@lib.ntu.edu.tw) on 2023-10-02T16:07:50Z No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2023-10-02T16:07:50Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 口試委員會審定書 i
誌謝 ii 中文摘要 iii Abstract v 目錄 viii 圖目錄 xi 表目錄 xii 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究背景與動機 1 第二節 研究目的 4 第三節 研究重要性 5 第二章 文獻回顧 6 第一節 腦中風介紹 6 一、 腦中風的定義及分類 6 二、 腦中風之流行病學 7 三、 腦中風之風險因子 9 四、 腦中風之治療、復健及相關醫療費用 10 第二節 社會經濟地位與健康不平等 13 一、 健康不平等的意涵與決定因素 13 二、 社會經濟地位與健康的關係 16 三、 社會經濟地位之測量指標 18 第三節 急性後期照護 19 一、 英美急性後期照護的概念與發展 19 二、 台灣急性後期照護的現況 22 三、 PAC與腦中風病人照護結果之相關研究 25 第四節 影響急性後期照護使用的決定因素 31 第五節 社經地位與腦中風照護結果與醫療利用之實證研究 36 第六節 社經地位與腦中風照護結果之中介效果相關研究 51 一、中介效果介紹 51 二、社經地位與照護結果之影響機轉及中介效果研究 53 第七節 綜合評論 55 第三章 研究方法 57 第一節 腦中風病人社經地位、急性後期照護與照護結果之相關性 57 一、 研究目的 57 二、 研究假說 57 三、 研究設計 58 四、 資料來源 58 五、 研究對象 59 六、 研究架構 60 七、研究變項與操作型定義 60 七、 統計分析方法 64 第二節 腦中風病人及其家屬選擇PAC模式的影響因素 66 一、 研究目的 66 二、 研究設計 66 三、 研究對象與招募 67 四、 資料蒐集 67 五、 資料分析 68 第四章 研究結果 69 第一節 腦中風病人社經地位、急性後期照護與照護結果之相關性 69 一、 描述性統計 69 二、 雙變項分析 72 三、 多變項分析及檢驗中介效應 74 第二節 腦中風病人及其家屬選擇PAC模式的影響因素 77 一、 專業醫療人員的建議 77 二、 健康照護資源的可近性 78 三、 照護連續性及協調性 79 四、 病人與親友的意願及過去經驗 79 五、 經濟因素 81 第五章 討論 87 第一節 腦中風病人社經地位、急性後期照護與照護結果之相關性 87 第二節 腦中風病人及其家屬選擇PAC模式的影響因素 89 第三節 研究限制 91 一、腦中風病人社經地位、急性後期照護與照護結果之相關性研究 91 二、腦中風病人及其家屬選擇PAC模式的影響因素研究 91 第六章 結論與建議 92 第一節 結論 92 一、 腦中風病人社經地位、急性後期照護與照護結果之相關性 92 二、 腦中風病人及其家屬選擇PAC模式的影響因素 92 第二節 建議 93 一、腦中風病人社經地位、急性後期照護與照護結果之相關性 93 二、腦中風病人及其家屬選擇PAC模式的影響因素 93 參考文獻 94 | - |
dc.language.iso | zh_TW | - |
dc.title | 腦中風病人社經地位、急性後期照護與照護結果之關係 | zh_TW |
dc.title | The Relationships Among Socioeconomic Status, Post-Acute Care and Outcome of Stroke Patients | en |
dc.type | Thesis | - |
dc.date.schoolyear | 111-2 | - |
dc.description.degree | 博士 | - |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 鍾國彪;張書森;鄭建興;李宗海 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | Kuo-Piao Chung;Shu-Sen Chang;Jiann-Shing Jeng;Tsong-Hai Lee | en |
dc.subject.keyword | 腦中風,急性後期照護模式,病人為中心照護,社經地位,功能性殘疾,復健,再住院, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | stroke,post-acute care model,patient-centered care,socioeconomic status,functional disability,rehabilitation,readmission, | en |
dc.relation.page | 104 | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202303211 | - |
dc.rights.note | 同意授權(限校園內公開) | - |
dc.date.accepted | 2023-08-09 | - |
dc.contributor.author-college | 公共衛生學院 | - |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 公共衛生碩士學位學程 | - |
顯示於系所單位: | 公共衛生碩士學位學程 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-111-2.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 2.28 MB | Adobe PDF | 檢視/開啟 |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。