Table 4 Assessment of acceptability of rehabilitation services (Dichotomized)

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 %)