Research report: The usefulness of complementary electronic anamnestic tool (CEAT) in advance care planning (ACP) in rehabilitation hospitals: practical and legal implications

A direct-observation study in rehabilitation hospitals examined the Complementary Electronic Anamnestic Tool, or CEAT, as an electronic health record innovation for advance care planning. The researchers analyzed 129 opinions from doctors and physiotherapists involved in admitting, treating and monitoring patients, together with clinical data from 86 patients. The paper reports that CEAT tests were associated with better wellbeing, fewer musculoskeletal complaints, and changes in body weight and waist circumference, with differences reported at p < 0.05.

The evaluation was conducted in accordance with the electronic health record procedures of the participating rehabilitation centres. Its professional component included doctors and physiotherapists whose work covered patient admission, treatment and monitoring. The abstract does not provide a breakdown of the 129 opinions by profession, nor does it report how respondents rated CEAT on individual dimensions of usefulness.

It therefore does not support a conclusion that clinicians found the tool useful, even though assessing its usefulness was an objective of the research. The patient analysis included 58 women with a mean age of 65.34 years and a standard deviation of 10.01, and 28 men with a mean age of 63.82 years and a standard deviation of 12.85. Researchers calculated the mean, median, standard deviation, minimum and maximum for quantitative variables.

Among the reported results, CEAT tests showed statistically significant improvements in wellbeing, reductions in musculoskeletal complaints, and changes in both body weight and waist circumference. The supplied abstract does not report the absolute measurements, effect sizes, follow-up period, comparison group or details of how CEAT tests were administered. The study also identified a discrepancy between patients’ declared participation in physical activity and the results obtained.

This mismatch was an observed finding rather than evidence about why the two measures differed. The authors’ conclusion emphasized the need to strengthen patients’ self-awareness and confidence in electronic health record processes, although the abstract does not specify whether confidence was directly measured. Although the original title refers to practical and legal implications, the supplied findings do not document particular legal effects, liability findings or regulatory consequences.

The available evidence instead focuses on the tool’s proposed role in advance care planning, its use within rehabilitation electronic health record procedures, and the mismatch between declared and measured physical activity. The paper was published as open-access research in BMC Health Services Research on 14 September 2026, and the supplied version was described as an early peer-reviewed article that could be replaced by a final version of record.

Subject of Research: Evaluation of an electronic anamnestic tool for advance care planning in rehabilitation hospitals

Article Title: The usefulness of complementary electronic anamnestic tool (CEAT) in advance care planning (ACP) in rehabilitation hospitals: practical and legal implications

Article References: Rosołek, B., Zwierzchowski, J. B., & Zwierzchowska, A. (2026). The usefulness of complementary electronic anamnestic tool (CEAT) in advance care planning (ACP) in rehabilitation hospitals: practical and legal implications. BMC Health Services Research. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-026-15489-9

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1186/s12913-026-15489-9

Keywords: advance care planning, electronic health records, rehabilitation hospitals, CEAT, patient assessment, physical activity, wellbeing, health services research, usefulness, complementary, electronic, anamnestic