Table 2.
Assessment of values of rehabilitation outcomes (Dichotomized)
| Frequency (valid%) | Valid Total N (%) | Missing N (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Not Critical | Critical | |||
| Outcomes | ||||
| Total Sample size (N = 176) | ||||
| Fewer hospital admissions | 75 (42.86 %) | 100 (57.14 %) | 175 (99.43 %) | 1 (0.43 %) |
| Increased independence | 29 (16.48 %) | 147 (83.52 %) | 176 (100 %) | 0 (0.0 %) |
| Decreased burden of care | 67 (38.07 %) | 109 (61.93 %) | 176 (100 %) | 0 (0.0 %) |
| Return to role/occupation that is age, gender and context relevant | 53 (30.11 %) | 123 (69.89 %) | 176 (100 %) | 0 (0.0 %) |
| Improved Quality of life | 18 (10.23 %) | 158 (89.77 %) | 176 (100 %) | 0 (0.0 %) |
| Increasing longevity | 73 (41.48 %) | 103 (58.52 %) | 176 (100 %) | 0 (0.0 %) |
| Reducing undesired health results or complications | 37 (21.02 %) | 139 (78.89 %) | 176 (100 %) | 0 (0.0 %) |
| Socio-economic status (e.g., poverty) | 63 (35.80 %) | 113 (64.20 %) | 176 (100 %) | 0 (0.0 %) |
| Increasing access to rehabilitation services | 35 (19.89 %) | 141 (80.11 %) | 176 (100 %) | 0 (0.0 %) |
| Optimizing utilization of rehabilitation services | 42 (23.86 %) | 134 (76.14 %) | 176 (100 %) | 0 (0.0 %) |