Abstract
There seems to be a lack of consistency of maintenance/community-based rehabilitation through long-term care insurance. We aimed to clarify whether consistent rehabilitation can be performed through long-term care insurance by questionnaires. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was a cross-sectional study in a nationwide survey among rehabilitation staff and care recipients who completed disease-specific rehabilitation and required maintenance/community-based rehabilitation through long-term care insurance. Consistency of rehabilitation was compared using Fisher's exact tests. The concordance of the rehabilitation evaluation and treatment conducted under medical and long-term care insurance was assessed using the κ coefficient. RESULTS: Six hundred questionnaires from care recipients and staff were analyzed. Of the rehabilitation staff, 264 (44%) obtained rehabilitation plans from medical institutions. There was a significant difference between the responses of "referral from the same medical corporation" and "obtaining the rehabilitation plan" by Fisher's exact test (odds ratio: 3.242; P<0.001). Most rehabilitation treatments under medical insurance comprised walking or training with parallel rods/canes [498 patients (83%)], and 454 patients (76%) received stretching and range-of-motion training for the limbs and spine for long-term care insurance. Muscle strength evaluation was the most frequently conducted under medical and long-term care insurance [383 (73%) and 487 (83%), respectively]. The concordance of the evaluation and treatment content, except for disease-specific evaluation, was low (κ coefficient≤0.6). CONCLUSIONS: The rate of provision of rehabilitation plans was low, and evaluation and treatment content under medical and long-term care insurance was inconsistent. Our results draw attention to the need for consistent rehabilitation plans between disease-specific and maintenance/community-based rehabilitation.