•  
  •  
 

Florian Allonsius, Basalt Rehabilitation center, Department of Innovation, Quality and Research, The Hague, The Netherlands; Leiden University Medical center, Department of Orthopedics, rehabilitation, and physical therapy, Leiden, The NetherlandsFollow
Frederike van Markus-Doornbosch, Basalt Rehabilitation center, Department of Innovation, Quality and Research, The Hague, The Netherlands
Arend de Kloet, Basalt Rehabilitation center, Department of Innovation, Quality and Research, The Hague, The Netherlands
Christiaan Gmelig Meyling, De Hoogstraat Rehabilitation, Department of Pediatric Rehabilitation, Utrecht, The Netherlands; UMC Utrecht Brain center and center of Excellence for Rehabilitation Medicine, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
Ingrid Rentinck, University Medical center Utrecht (UMCU), Department of Pediatric Psychology, Sector of Neuropsychology, The Netherlands
Suzanne Lambregts, Revant Rehabilitation center, Department of Pediatric Rehabilitation Breda, The Netherlands
Nicole Bovens, Revant Rehabilitation center, Department of Pediatric Rehabilitation Breda, The Netherlands
Karin Huizing, Rehabilitation center Friesland, Department of Pediatric Rehabilitation, Beetsterzwaag, The Netherlands
Martine Sinnema, Rehabilitation center Friesland, Department of Pediatric Rehabilitation, Beetsterzwaag, The Netherlands
Hannemieke van der Lei, Heliomare Rehabilitation center, Department of Pediatric Rehabilitation, Wijk aan Zee, The Netherlands
Amanda van Zuijlekom, Rijndam Rehabilitation center, Department of Pediatric Rehabilitation, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Suzanne Franssen, Klimmendaal Rehabilitation center, Department of Pediatric Rehabilitation, Arnhem, The Netherlands
Wietse D.C. Gaykema, Roessingh center for Rehabilitation, Department of Pediatric Rehabilitation, Enschede, the Netherlands
Thea Vliet Vlieland, Basalt Rehabilitation center, Department of Innovation, Quality and Research, The Hague, The Netherlands; Leiden University Medical center, Department of Orthopedics, rehabilitation, and physical therapy, Leiden, The Netherlands
Menno van der Holst, Basalt Rehabilitation center, Department of Innovation, Quality and Research, The Hague, The Netherlands; Leiden University Medical center, Department of Orthopedics, rehabilitation, and physical therapy, Leiden, The Netherlands

Abstract

Purpose: To describe how rehabilitation care is organized for young patients (4-25 years) with acquired brain injury (ABI) in Dutch outpatient rehabilitation centers (RCs). Due to differences between RCs in terms of history/culture, team composition/expertise, and collaborative networks, variations in de provision and content of care between RCs are expected. Methods: In this cross-sectional-survey-study, professionals from RCs were invited to complete a 21-item-questionnaire (12 yes/no-& 9 corresponding open-ended-questions) on the organization of rehabilitation care for young patients with ABI. Three topics were: admission/discharge criteria (n=2&2), rehabilitation treatment (n=7&5), and aftercare (n=3&2). Answers to yes/no-questions were descriptively analyzed, and open-ended-questions were thematically categorized. Items being present or absent and thematically analyzed answers were noted as numbers/percentages per RC. Results: Twelve RCs participated. Regarding admission/discharge criteria, only the item “having an ABI diagnosis” was present in all RCs (100%), whereas the other five admission criteria were present in 25-42% of RCs. Discharge criterium "attainment of goals" was present in 83% of RCs. Regarding rehabilitation treatment, all RCs (100%) described the presence of “specialized teams” and “diagnosis-specific consultation appointments”. Sixty-seven percent of RCs have “general ABI-treatment protocols” and “young adult transition-teams”. Concerning aftercare, structural end-reports, standard appointments at discharge and follow-up with physicians were present in all RCs (100%), but discharge and follow-up timing (between 6 weeks-12 months) and frequency (e.g., once a year) all differed. Conclusions: Despite similarities across Dutch RCs, there were differences in the provision and content of rehabilitation care regarding admission/discharge criteria, organization of rehabilitation treatment, and aftercare. Gaining insight into differences may help to reach consensus regarding ‘best practice’ on the organization of rehabilitation care for young patients with ABI.

Download

Share

COinS