The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Disabled people and professionals differ in their perceptions of rehabilitation needs

Disabled people and professionals differ in their perceptions of rehabilitation needs
Disabled people and professionals differ in their perceptions of rehabilitation needs
Background. This study set out to explore whether there are systematic differences in unmet needs for rehabilitation services and resources as identified by disabled people and nominated key professionals.
Method. A cross-sectional interview survey of 87 pairs of community-dwelling disabled people (aged 16-65) and their nominated key professionals was conducted in southern England. The Southampton Needs Assessment Questionnaire (SNAQ) was used to examine unmet needs and the Office of Population Censuses and Surveys (OPCS) Disability and Severity Scale to Examine level of disability.
Results. Eighty-seven pairs of disabled people and their nominated key professionals participated. People were severely disabled (median OPCS score 8; interquartile range 6-9). Disabled participants reported significantly more unmet needs than did professionals. There was zero concordance on identified unmet needs between disabled participants and professionals in 56 per cent of cases. Concordance between disabled participants and professionals was significantly better if the disabled participant had reported more unmet needs. There was a trend for general practitioners to be poorer at reporting disabled participants' needs than other professionals. There was fair agreement between disabled participants and professionals in five areas of unmet need only (in descending order): adaptations, physiotherapy, equipment, assistance with 'non-care' activities and the use of a day centre. In all the other areas of unmet need the agreement was poor.
Conclusion. Needs for rehabilitation services and resources (for disabled people) are perceived differently by disabled people and professionals. Until we know who is right about rehabilitation needs, it is important to determine both users' and providers' views when planning and commissioning services.
rehabilitation needs, disabled people, professionals, Southampton Needs Assessment Questionnaire
0957-4832
393-399
Kersten, P.
b5c4e49b-d73b-46f1-bdc4-266170562b67
George, S.
bdfc752b-f67e-4490-8dc0-99bfaeb046ca
McLellan, L.
453c9511-f6e1-4e7e-ab8c-1826c1878660
Smith, J.
306ead64-2109-42a9-8d5d-56539de3a863
Mullee, M.
fd3f91c3-5e95-4f56-8d73-260824eeb362
Kersten, P.
b5c4e49b-d73b-46f1-bdc4-266170562b67
George, S.
bdfc752b-f67e-4490-8dc0-99bfaeb046ca
McLellan, L.
453c9511-f6e1-4e7e-ab8c-1826c1878660
Smith, J.
306ead64-2109-42a9-8d5d-56539de3a863
Mullee, M.
fd3f91c3-5e95-4f56-8d73-260824eeb362

Kersten, P., George, S., McLellan, L., Smith, J. and Mullee, M. (2000) Disabled people and professionals differ in their perceptions of rehabilitation needs. Journal of Public Health Medicine, 22 (3), 393-399.

Record type: Article

Abstract

Background. This study set out to explore whether there are systematic differences in unmet needs for rehabilitation services and resources as identified by disabled people and nominated key professionals.
Method. A cross-sectional interview survey of 87 pairs of community-dwelling disabled people (aged 16-65) and their nominated key professionals was conducted in southern England. The Southampton Needs Assessment Questionnaire (SNAQ) was used to examine unmet needs and the Office of Population Censuses and Surveys (OPCS) Disability and Severity Scale to Examine level of disability.
Results. Eighty-seven pairs of disabled people and their nominated key professionals participated. People were severely disabled (median OPCS score 8; interquartile range 6-9). Disabled participants reported significantly more unmet needs than did professionals. There was zero concordance on identified unmet needs between disabled participants and professionals in 56 per cent of cases. Concordance between disabled participants and professionals was significantly better if the disabled participant had reported more unmet needs. There was a trend for general practitioners to be poorer at reporting disabled participants' needs than other professionals. There was fair agreement between disabled participants and professionals in five areas of unmet need only (in descending order): adaptations, physiotherapy, equipment, assistance with 'non-care' activities and the use of a day centre. In all the other areas of unmet need the agreement was poor.
Conclusion. Needs for rehabilitation services and resources (for disabled people) are perceived differently by disabled people and professionals. Until we know who is right about rehabilitation needs, it is important to determine both users' and providers' views when planning and commissioning services.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 3 November 2000
Keywords: rehabilitation needs, disabled people, professionals, Southampton Needs Assessment Questionnaire

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 55331
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/55331
ISSN: 0957-4832
PURE UUID: 0eacba0e-9e94-4f8e-8657-480584b6281a

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 05 Aug 2008
Last modified: 08 Jan 2022 19:04

Export record

Contributors

Author: P. Kersten
Author: S. George
Author: L. McLellan
Author: J. Smith
Author: M. Mullee

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×