透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.15.202.4
  • 學位論文

社區失能者使用居家復健之相關因素探討:以台北縣為例

Factors Related to the Utilization of Home-Based Rehabilitaton Among Community-Living People With Disabilities — The Case of Taipei County

指導教授 : 毛慧芬
若您是本文的作者,可授權文章由華藝線上圖書館中協助推廣。

摘要


居家復健是國內近年來新興的社區健康照護服務,確實瞭解使用居家復健服務者的特質,及影響其使用此服務的相關因素,可協助有關單位更了解服務的狀況,失能者的需求是否滿足,並檢視服務方針與執行結果是否契合,同時維持財政的健全。 本研究目的旨在探討台北縣長期照顧管理中心的收案對象中,經評估人員建議有居家復健需求者,影響其使用該服務的相關因素為何。研究使用Andersen健康服務使用行為模式為參考架構,研究資料來自2005~2007年轉介至台北縣長期照顧管理中心之個案資料庫。研究對象為647位經評估建議有居家復健需求之個案,扣除不符補助標準的個案53位後,共有594人納入分析,其中有541人經評估後建議接受居家物理治療,203人經評估後建議接受居家職能治療。而實際使用居家復健服務者(包括使用居家物理治療或居家職能治療,或兩者皆使用)共260人(接受率43.8%),使用居家物理治療者共236人(接受率43.6%),使用居家職能治療者則有56人(接受率27.6%)。經羅吉斯迴歸分析影響個案使用居家復健服務、居家物理治療、及居家職能治療之相關因素後,發現若個案同時使用長照中心多項服務、其評估人員非治療師、使用或不使用輔具下無法行走五十公尺者,使用居家復健服務及居家物理治療的機會均較高;而若個案為女性、未婚、一般戶、同時使用長照中心多項服務,其使用居家職能治療的機會較高。本研究結果顯示,經評估人員建議有居家復健需求者,實際使用居家復健服務時仍會受到傾向、使能、及需求三個層面的因素所影響,且不同類型服務(居家物理治療、居家職能治療)的影響因素也有所差異。然而因羅吉斯迴歸分析結果可解釋的變異量僅有4.4%(使用居家復健服務)、5.0%(使用居家物理治療)、31.8%(使用居家職能治療),顯示尚有許多潛在有影響的因素未能發現,因此未來仍應持續針對此議題進行探討,以期提供居家復健服務單位在修訂服務規範時更完善的資訊。

關鍵字

居家復健 使用 相關因素

並列摘要


Home-based rehabilitation is a new and developing health service in Taiwan. A clear understanding of the characteristics of service users and factors related to whether they use services will help our affiliates to meet the demand from community-living people with disabilities , to provide them better service, and to maintain financially sound at the same time. The aim of the study is to explore which factors influenced people from the Long-term Care Management Center of Taipei County qualified for home–based rehabilitation to use this service. This study is based upon the conceptual framework of Andersen Behavioral Model to examine the factors affecting utilization of home-based rehabilitation service, which include physical therapy and occupational therapy. Data for this study comes from the Long-term Care Management Center of Taipei County (2005~2007). In this sample, 647 disabled persons were recommended to receive home-based rehabilitation service, but only 594 were eligible for reimbursement (541 for physical therapy, and 203 for occupational therapy), and 260 of them used the service ( 236 for physical therapy, and 56 for occupational therapy). The Acceptance rates are 43.8%( home-based rehabilitation service), 43.6%( home-based physical therapy), and 27.6%( home-based occupational therapy). We applied logistic regression to predict the likelyhood of using home-based rehabilitation (including using physical therapy or occupational therapy, or both), using home-based physical therapy, and using home-based occupational therapy. Analysis showed that“Using multiple services”, “Walking difficulty”, and“Assessors”were key factors both for using home-based rehabilitation and for using home-based physical therapy,“Gender”,“marital status”,“Using multiple services”, and“income”were key factors for using home-based occupational therapy. The results show if predisposing,enabling, and need factors affect users qualified for home-based rehabilitation and what are the key factors will dependend on the type of the sevice(PT or OT). However, The results of logistic regression show that Nagelkerke R square is really low(home-based rehabilitaion:4.4%, home-based physical therapy:5.0%, home-based occupational therpay:31.8%).That’s to say, there are many potential factors undiscovered. So it’s recommended to conduct further study to provide more information for home-based affliliates.

參考文獻


胡名霞 (1998)。物理治療與長期照護。中華民國物理治療雜誌,23,52-60。
林昭宏、陳建智、林永哲(1993)。影響高屏地區中風病人接受復健治療因素的探討。中華民國物理治療雜誌,18(2),145-155。
毛慧芬、紀彣宙、吳淑瓊(2007)。台灣長期照護之職能治療人力需要推估。職能治療學會雜誌,25(2),32-52。
李守義、周碧瑟、宴涵文(1989)。健康信念模式的回顧與前瞻。中華衛誌,9(3),123-136。
官蔚菁(2004)。台灣健康信念模式研究之統合分析。國立成功大學護理所碩士論文

延伸閱讀