International Comparison of Vocational Rehabilitation for Persons With Spinal Cord Injury: Systems, Practices, and Barriers

Author:

Roels Ellen H.1,Reneman Michiel F.1,New Peter W.2,Kiekens Carlotte34,Van Roey Lot4,Townson Andrea5,Scivoletto Giorgio6,Smith Eimear7,Eriks-Hoogland Inge8,Staubli Stefan8,Post Marcel W.M.19

Affiliation:

1. University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Center for Rehabilitation, Groningen, the Netherlands

2. Spinal Rehabilitation Service, Caulfield Hospital, Alfred Health, Caulfield, Epworth-Monash Rehabilitation Medicine Unit, Monash University, Melbourne, and Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health & Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Victoria, Australia

3. University Hospitals Leuven, Department of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Leuven, Belgium

4. KU Leuven – University of Leuven, Department of Development and Regeneration, Leuven, Belgium

5. GF Strong Rehabilitation Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada

6. Spinal Unit and Spinal Rehabilitation (SpiRe) lab, IRCCS Fondazione S. Lucia, Rome, Italy

7. National Rehabilitation Hospital, Dun Laoghaire, Co. Dublin, Ireland

8. Swiss Paraplegic Centre, Nottwil, Switzerland

9. Center of Excellence for Rehabilitation Medicine, UMC Utrecht Brain Center, University Medical Center Utrecht and De Hoogstraat Rehabilitation, Utrecht, the Netherlands

Abstract

Background: Employment rates among people with spinal cord injury or spinal cord disease (SCI/D) show considerable variation across countries. One factor to explain this variation is differences in vocational rehabilitation (VR) systems. International comparative studies on VR however are nonexistent. Objectives: To describe and compare VR systems and practices and barriers for return to work in the rehabilitation of persons with SCI/D in multiple countries. Methods: A survey including clinical case examples was developed and completed by medical and VR experts from SCI/D rehabilitation centers in seven countries between April and August 2017. Results: Location (rehabilitation center vs community), timing (around admission, toward discharge, or after discharge from clinical rehabilitation), and funding (eg, insurance, rehabilitation center, employer, or community) of VR practices differ. Social security services vary greatly. The age and preinjury occupation of the patient influences the content of VR in some countries. Barriers encountered during VR were similar. No participant mentioned lack of interest in VR among team members as a barrier, but all mentioned lack of education of the team on VR as a barrier. Other frequently mentioned barriers were fatigue of the patient (86%), lack of confidence of the patient in his/her ability to work (86%), a gap in the team's knowledge of business/legal aspects (86%), and inadequate transportation/accessibility (86%). Conclusion: VR systems and practices, but not barriers, differ among centers. The variability in VR systems and social security services should be considered when comparing VR study results.

Publisher

American Spinal Injury Association

Subject

Neurology (clinical),Rehabilitation,Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3