Quality requirement 5: Community rehabilitation and support

People with LTNCs living at home are to have ongoing access to a comprehensive range of rehabilitation, advice and support to meet their continuing and changing needs, increase their independence and autonomy and help them to live as they wish.

Easy access to ongoing community rehabilitation, advice and support

 

Service responsive to changing, ongoing needs

 

 

Indicators of progress

Bernard et al (2010) found that people in receipt of rehabilitation services from a CINRT tended to have improved specialist support and continuity of care. Service users particularly valued the support of CINRTs where it was ongoing, flexible in place/time of delivery and holistic in approach. Ongoing support from nurse specialists was also highly valued by service users.
Access to day opportunities that offered peer support and social and leisure opportunities, as well as access to meaningful activity and/or learning and employment opportunities, was an important element in community rehabilitation and support.
Just over a quarter (81/282) of the adults with LTNCs in Jackson’s 2011a study, had received community rehabilitation or day care (on average six times a month) in the year before the survey. And half (145/282) had contact with out-patient therapy services of one kind or another, though the extent to which their on-going needs were being met is not known. A similar picture was found for the 142 adults with LTNCs in Jackson’s 2011b study.

Hoppitt et al (2011) found a high proportion of people using rehabilitation services, indicating that the majority of patients were aware of available services.

Abbott and Carpenter (2009) found evidence that, for young men with DMD, an educational paradigm can be more enabling than one based on rehabilitation and support. Support was evidently much more effective if it was provided in as natural a way as possible, e.g. the university student whose paid carers were also students with whom he went to parties if he wished).

Inhibitors of progress

Bernard et al (2010) found that some people had problems in accessing ongoing and flexible support due to:

  • a lack of local availability or capacity of services

  • restrictive eligibility criteria

  • pathways that were ill-defined and unclear

 

 

Valid CSS! Valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional