4.5 Editorial Material

What is rehabilitation? An empirical investigation leading to an evidence-based description

期刊

CLINICAL REHABILITATION
卷 34, 期 5, 页码 571-583

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/0269215520905112

关键词

Rehabilitation description; content; process; therapy; person-centred

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: There is no agreement about or understanding of what rehabilitation is; those who pay for it, those who provide it, and those who receive it all have different interpretations. Furthermore, within each group, there will be a variety of opinions. Definitions based on authority or on theory also vary and do not give a clear description of what someone buying, providing, or receiving rehabilitation can actually expect. Method: This editorial extracts information from systematic reviews that find rehabilitation to be effective, to discover the key features and to develop an empirical definition. Findings: The evidence shows that rehabilitation may benefit any person with a long-lasting disability, arising from any cause, may do so at any stage of the illness, at any age, and may be delivered in any setting. Effective rehabilitation depends on an expert multidisciplinary team, working within the biopsychosocial model of illness and working collaboratively towards agreed goals. The effective general interventions include exercise, practice of tasks, education of and self-management by the patient, and psychosocial support. In addition, a huge range of other interventions may be needed, making rehabilitation an extremely complex process; specific actions must be tailored to the needs, goals, and wishes of the individual patient, but the consequences of any action are unpredictable and may not even be those anticipated. Conclusion: Effective rehabilitation is a person-centred process, with treatment tailored to the individual patient's needs and, importantly, personalized monitoring of changes associated with intervention, with further changes in goals and actions if needed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据