Table 4.
Assessment of acceptability of rehabilitation services (Dichotomized)
| Frequency (valid%) | Valid total N (%) | Missing N (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Definitely not acceptable | Definitely acceptable | |||
| Rehabilitation Services | ||||
| Total N (%) = 176 (100 %) | ||||
| The use of questionnaire for identifying rehabilitation needs (relative to no such use) | 72 (41.62 %) | 101 (58.38 %) | 173 (98.30 %) | 3 (1.70 %) |
| Integrated and decentralized rehabilitation services (relative to centralized rehabilitation services) | 50 (28.90 %) | 123 (71.10 %) | 173 (98.30 %) | 3 (1.70 %) |
| Rehabilitation services funded by both public and private sector (relative to those only publicly funded or only privately funded) | 63 (36.42 %) | 110 (63.58 %) | 173 (98.30 %) | 3 (1.70 %) |
| Rehabilitation services that provide free care or subsidized care for the poor (relative to no such care) | 39 (22.54 %) | 134 (77.46 %) | 173 (98.30 %) | 3 (1.70 %) |
| Health insurance coverage for rehabilitation services (relative to no health insurance coverage) | 67 (38.73 %) | 106 (61.27 %) | 173 (98.30 %) | 3 (1.70 %) |
| Providing rehabilitation services within specialized hospitals and units (relative to general hospitals or non specialized units) | 55 (31.79 %) | 118 (68.21 %) | 173 (98.30 %) | 3 (1.70 %) |
| Having rehabilitation delivered through your health provider (relative to having rehabilitation delivered through other providers /services like social welfare. | 46 (26.59 %) | 127 (73.41 %) | 173 (98.30 %) | 3 (1.70 %) |
| Community based rehabilitation (relative to hospital or clinic based rehabilitation) | 36 (20.81 %) | 137 (79.19 %) | 173 (98.30 %) | 3 (1.70 %) |
| Multidisciplinary rehabilitation integrated within trauma care (relative to trauma care without rehabilitation services) | 41 (23.70 %) | 132 (76.30 %) | 173 (98.30 %) | 3 (1.70 %) |
| The use of data collection / management and dissemination systems (relative to no such use) | 54 (31.03 %) | 120 (68.97 %) | 174 (98.86 %) | 2 (1.14 %) |
| Increasing the culture of data collection and use as well as acceptability and reliability of data (relatively to not increasing such a culture) | 52 (29.89 %) | 122 (70.11 %) | 174 (98.86 %) | 2 (1.14 %) |
| Provision of assistive technology free of charge (relative to prescription only) | 52 (29.89 %) | 122 (70.11 %) | 174 (98.86 %) | 2 (1.14 %) |
| Educational intervention promoting the use of assistive technology (relative to no such intervention) | 35 (20.22 %) | 139 (79.89 %) | 174 (98.86 %) | 2 (1.14 %) |
| Tele audiology in comparison (relative to standard face-to-face audiology) | 104 (59.77 %) | 70 (40.23 %) | 174 (98.86 %) | 2 (1.14 %) |
| Engaging clinicians / managers to collect and use data (relative to no such engagement) | 57 (32.76 %) | 117 (67.24 %) | 174 (98.86 %) | 2 (1.14 %) |
| Home-based rehabilitation programs (relative to usual care) | 31 (17.82 %) | 143 (82.18 %) | 174 (98.86 %) | 2 (1.14 %) |
| Tele rehabilitation strategies (relative to usual care) | 89 (51.15 %) | 85 (48.85 %) | 174 (98.86 %) | 2 (1.14 %) |
| Task-shifting (relative to usual care) | 112 (64.37 %) | 62 (35.63 %) | 174 (98.86 %) | 2 (1.14 %) |