O. Detsyk, Halyna Y Yukish, O. Burak, I. Stovban, Zhanna M Zolotarova, Nataliia B. Fedorkiv, Ihor M. Karpinets
{"title":"Analysis of Rehabilitation Inefficiency in Persons with Disabilities After Musculoskeletal Injuries","authors":"O. Detsyk, Halyna Y Yukish, O. Burak, I. Stovban, Zhanna M Zolotarova, Nataliia B. Fedorkiv, Ihor M. Karpinets","doi":"10.36740/abal202201111","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: To analyze the reasons of low rehabilitation efficiency of persons with disabilities after musculoskeletal injuries. Materials and Methods: A retrospective study of the 102 people’s records whose permanent disability is extended after next certification was conducted. Results: Only 31.4% persons reduced the severity of disability. The rest remained unchanged (67.6%) or deteriorated (1.0%). Permanent disability after musculoskeletal injuries is typical for men (86.3%), villagers (74.5%), working age (99.0%), of which 37.5% – men under 40 years. Near half persons (45.1%) have passed the next re-examination more than 3 times; in 52.0% ones four or more years have passed after injury; in 9.8% cases the continuation of rehabilitation is considered as hopeless. Defects in the implementation of rehabilitation measures were revealed, namely: excessive use of drugs with insufficient evidence of effectiveness (85.3-88.2%), inadequate coverage of physical therapy and occupational therapy (56.4%), a formal approach to the individual rehabilitation programs (IRP) formation, in particular in the assessment of rehabilitation potential (100.0%), the degree of movement restrictions (20.6%), social and labor rehabilitation (36.3%). Despite the fact that the majority of the observed people (86.3%) were recognized as capable for work, only 63.7% were provided with advice on rational employment, and 78.4% of them do not work. Conclusions: Improving of the rehabilitation effectiveness requires comprehensive integrated solutions at the state level in order to change approaches to assessing the degree of disability, the formation and implementation of IRP based on modern world standards.","PeriodicalId":42213,"journal":{"name":"Acta Balneologica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Balneologica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36740/abal202201111","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Aim: To analyze the reasons of low rehabilitation efficiency of persons with disabilities after musculoskeletal injuries. Materials and Methods: A retrospective study of the 102 people’s records whose permanent disability is extended after next certification was conducted. Results: Only 31.4% persons reduced the severity of disability. The rest remained unchanged (67.6%) or deteriorated (1.0%). Permanent disability after musculoskeletal injuries is typical for men (86.3%), villagers (74.5%), working age (99.0%), of which 37.5% – men under 40 years. Near half persons (45.1%) have passed the next re-examination more than 3 times; in 52.0% ones four or more years have passed after injury; in 9.8% cases the continuation of rehabilitation is considered as hopeless. Defects in the implementation of rehabilitation measures were revealed, namely: excessive use of drugs with insufficient evidence of effectiveness (85.3-88.2%), inadequate coverage of physical therapy and occupational therapy (56.4%), a formal approach to the individual rehabilitation programs (IRP) formation, in particular in the assessment of rehabilitation potential (100.0%), the degree of movement restrictions (20.6%), social and labor rehabilitation (36.3%). Despite the fact that the majority of the observed people (86.3%) were recognized as capable for work, only 63.7% were provided with advice on rational employment, and 78.4% of them do not work. Conclusions: Improving of the rehabilitation effectiveness requires comprehensive integrated solutions at the state level in order to change approaches to assessing the degree of disability, the formation and implementation of IRP based on modern world standards.