Screening for rehabilitation needs of patients in care of family practitioners
Pullwitt, D.H.; Krause, O.; Hildebrand, F.; Fischer, G.C.
Gesundheitswesen ) 59(11): 613-618
1997
ISSN/ISBN: 0941-3790 PMID: 9476421 Document Number: 482212
Family doctors play an important role in promoting the access of patients to rehabilitation. On the one hand they are very often the first professionals to be contacted if patients want to take part in rehabilitation procedures whereas on the other hand there are also many patients whose need for rehabilitation remains undisclosed. No detailed estimates are available on how many of such patients exist in German GP-practices although it should be an important task of family doctors to discuss the pros and cons of rehabilitation particularly with their patients who are in need of it. We performed a non-representative pilot study in three GP offices during ten working days. patients older than 29 years were screened for their "rehabilitation status" with an instrument frequently used in German rehabilitation clinics. The patients were also asked whether or not they would like to participate in a rehabilitation procedure and what was the reason for their decision. Not knowing the patients' answers their doctors rated whether or not it would be appropriate for their patients to take part in rehabilitation. Additionally the doctors stated what kind of rehabilitation should be performed and what could be ist aims. In a sample of 181 patients about one-third was found to be in a severe "rehabilitation status", about one third in a state with higher than normal values--although not severe--and also approx. another third had a normal status. Family doctors stated that for one-third of their patients rehabilitation would be undoubtedly suitable at the time of the screening. In about two thirds of the cases the results of the questionnaire and the doctors' ratings corresponded. Some patients felt completely healthy although the results of the questionnaire and the doctors' statements rated them as being in need of rehabilitation. Other patients in need of rehabilitation rejected it for other than health-related reasons. The results of our study give evidence to the family doctors' key role for patients' access to rehabilitation. A representative study with a larger sample should be performed in the future because it could yield more detailed figures on the rehabilitation needs of family doctors' patients. Possibilities of standardised screening for rehabilitation needs in primary medical are should also be studied. The results of our pilot study also indicate the need for studies concerning non-medical causes of underutilised rehabilitation facilities. Family doctors should discuss these problems with their patients.