File
H. Naeem1, G. Zaman1, H. Al-Agele1
1ICRC, PRP, Islamabad, Pakistan
Background: An estimated 6.2% of the Pakistanis have some form of disability and its increasing due to growing burden of disabilities due to injuries and non-communicable diseases. In Pakistan, ICRC is addressing this sector since 1984 by strengthening physical rehabilitation services. Currently, its physical rehabilitation program (PRP) is supporting 18 Physical Rehabilitation Centers (PRCs) in the country with the collaboration of different public and private entities.
Purpose: Beneficiary Feedback & Technical Assessment (BFTA) is a tool developed by ICRC to evaluate the quality of services they are supporting and to work towards improving them by the assessment of services quality and patients’ feedback.
Methods: In 2022 BFTA exercise, 11 out of 18 PRCs were selected across four provinces. The duration of study were three months where four Technical Support Team (TST) members of PRP interviewed 167 patients and did quality assessment of 192 devices using pre-designed questionnaire. Epi-Info 7 software was used for data analysis.
Results:Accessibility: Physical Rehabilitation service provided by supported organizations are free of cost (97%). There is a strong referral mechanism in place where 95% of SU visited PRC by a referral. According to the results, average travel time to access PRC services is 2 hours and 24% SUs received transport allowance. However, the main concern in missing a follow up visit was reported to be the distance to travel and or cost of travel. More than 50% considered dormitory services very important.
Quality: 98% of SUs were well informed about all treatment steps and functioning of rehabilitation services. 90% of SU considered the device comfortable to use and helpful in increasing the mobility level significantly. In terms of rating the quality, 10% of the devices got yes, 66% got average, whereas 24% got poor. In terms of functionality and fit its purpose, 12% were good to be used, 52% needed repair, and 36% were found to be replaced.
Socio-economic impact: 78% of SUs consider device very important for earning their livelihood. 83% consider it very important for interacting within their communities. At the same time, 79% feel uncomfortable for being seen as a person with disability.
Quality: 98% of SUs were well informed about all treatment steps and functioning of rehabilitation services. 90% of SU considered the device comfortable to use and helpful in increasing the mobility level significantly. In terms of rating the quality, 10% of the devices got yes, 66% got average, whereas 24% got poor. In terms of functionality and fit its purpose, 12% were good to be used, 52% needed repair, and 36% were found to be replaced.
Socio-economic impact: 78% of SUs consider device very important for earning their livelihood. 83% consider it very important for interacting within their communities. At the same time, 79% feel uncomfortable for being seen as a person with disability.
Conclusions: PRP services have made SUs an active ambulators within their communities and helped them to improve their household income. However, most of them still facing the challenge of societal integration. Although the services are provided free of cost, still the cost of traveling is the most significant barrier in treatment compliance. Half of the SUs considered dormitory services substantial that ultimately can reduce travel frequency.
In terms of quality, more than half of the devices were found to be repaired and more than one third to be replace, which is quite alarming.
In terms of quality, more than half of the devices were found to be repaired and more than one third to be replace, which is quite alarming.
Implications: Firstly, there should be more frequent visits by TST for quality assessment of the devices.
Secondly, a targeted financial support for transport reimbursement can be considered to improve treatment compliance.
Thirdly, there should be a social inclusion component in all physical rehabilitation services where SUs can be sensitized and connected to support structure for batter societal integration.
Secondly, a targeted financial support for transport reimbursement can be considered to improve treatment compliance.
Thirdly, there should be a social inclusion component in all physical rehabilitation services where SUs can be sensitized and connected to support structure for batter societal integration.
Funding acknowledgements: `This study was conducted as a part of Internationa Committee of the Red Cross' Physical Rehabilitation Program in Pakistan.
Keywords:
Quality of service
Disability
Physical Rehabilitation
Quality of service
Disability
Physical Rehabilitation
Topics:
Disability & rehabilitation
Community based rehabilitation
Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) & risk factors
Disability & rehabilitation
Community based rehabilitation
Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) & risk factors
Did this work require ethics approval? Yes
Institution: Khyber Medical University
Committee: KMU-IMPR
Ethics number: EB2023/861
All authors, affiliations and abstracts have been published as submitted.
