Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Mixed methods evaluation explores the benefits of a peer-supported breakfast group for inpatient burn survivors, suggesting positive outcomes.
Background: Burn injuries have complex physical and psychological consequences, making holistic rehabilitation essential. This mixed methods service evaluation explored the acceptability and perceived benefits of a peer-supported breakfast group delivered as part of routine occupational therapy practice for adult inpatient burn survivors. Methods: A tailored survey integrating PROMIS items with open-ended questions was completed by nine participants. All English-speaking inpatients aged >18 years who attended were invited to participate. In total 36 patients attended and 9 completed the survey (n = 36; n = 9). A convergent design integrated open-ended survey responses with PROMIS patient-reported outcome items, analysed thematically and interpreted using the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance) and MMR-RHS (Mixed Methods Reporting—Rehabilitation and Health Sciences) frameworks. Results: Quantitative findings suggested high perceived physical function and strong emotional support, with low anxiety and depression, and low social isolation. Reflexive thematic analysis generated four themes: fostering human connection and emotional wellbeing; restoring autonomy and confidence; preparing physically and psychologically for discharge; and the influence of the rehabilitation environment. Conclusion: While descriptive only, findings provide early insight into the value of peer-supported group activity in inpatient burn care. Larger controlled studies with baseline measurement are needed to evaluate effectiveness and implementation feasibility.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lottie Elizabeth Armitage (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: