Rehabilitation plan and outcome management system
Specialists see rehabilitation goals, assigned actions and patient feedback. Evaluation of results helps to review the plan and align further tasks.
Rehabilitation goals, assigned procedures, home tasks and specialist assessments are stored in different forms. A plan change is not always visible to the entire team. The patient may be uncertain about the general direction of work, and professionals have to repeat information gathering. It is harder to discuss progress along the same objectives.
How the solution works
- Identify the patient's purpose and primary function
- Prepare individual actions and review time
- Collecting performance facts and patient experience
- Re-evaluation of appropriate
- Adjust the plan or pass the continuing care action
Key challenges
- Rehabilitation Plan Fragmented Between Specialists and Procedures
- Home exercise execution and feedback are poorly seen
- Evaluation of results is not consistently structured
- Multidisciplinary team communication fragmented
Solution capabilities
Individual Purpose
Linking the patient's daily activities and priority with the specialist's assessment. The same diagnostic code does not set a uniform plan for everyone.
Team plan
The specialist sees the version of the plan he needs, restrictions and important changes from colleagues. It is possible to open the original clinical record.
Tasks at Home
The patient is provided with specialist-selected instructions, frequency of performance and individual limitations. If necessary, this information can also be transmitted outside the digital channel.
Patient feedback
The patient's responses are reviewed at an agreed time by a designated specialist. He assesses what needs to be further clarified about the performance of the task and its effects.
Comparison of the result
The tool used, its version and the conditions of the assessment are retained at the evaluation. The specialist discusses the change in accordance with the intended purpose, assessing also the maintenance of the function and other circumstances affecting the result.
Business context
- Rehabilitation Plan Fragmented Between Specialists and Procedures
- Rehabilitation goals, assigned procedures, home tasks and specialist assessments are stored in different forms. A plan change is not always visible to the entire team. The patient may be uncertain about the general direction of work, and professionals have to repeat information gathering. It is harder to discuss progress along the same objectives.
- Home exercise execution and feedback are poorly seen
- Home exercise instructions are given orally or on paper, and the patient's questions and performance difficulties do not return to the same plan review. The specialist re-explains what he has managed to accomplish during his next visit. The patient may remain with an unclear task between visits or not receive the necessary explanation.
- Evaluation of results is not consistently structured
- Progress is assessed at different times, scales and descriptions. It is not always clear whether the two results are comparable and under what conditions they are obtained. The specialist finds it more difficult to explain a particular change and revise the plan. The patient does not see a clear basis for assessment, and the center cannot consistently examine the results of its services.
- Multidisciplinary team communication fragmented
- Specialist comments and plan changes are transmitted orally or in separate records. It is not always appointed who has to familiarize themselves with the decision and apply it in their work. Another procedure may be planned based on outdated information. The patient has to repeat the agreements himself, and the team additionally combines the issues already discussed.
- The patient understands his actions between visits
- Rehabilitation also continues at home, where the patient needs clear tasks and the ability to provide feedback. The overall plan helps professionals discuss progress and apply follow-up actions. Results are measured by agreed measurements without offering equal promise of improvement to different patients.
Core features
- Individual Purpose
- Team plan
- Tasks at Home
- Patient feedback
- Comparison of the result
Key integrations
- Clinical System and Procedure Calendar
- Appointments, performance facts and accepted plan changes.
- Patient feedback channel
- Self-reported data with their time, origin and viewing state.
Potential impact (%)
The ranges indicate an illustrative relative change in the metric under the stated assumptions. Results depend on the starting position and actual use of the solution. Percentages for different metrics must not be added together.
Number of actions corrected due to non-transferred plan change
5–25%Decreasing
This illustrative scenario assumes that 20-50% of missed actions can be identified through task and deadline tracking. That share is assumed to fall by 25-50%. Company data is needed to verify both the addressable share and the resulting change.
Compute actions corrected for non-transferable already accepted plan corrections.
Number of missed scheduled progress reviews
2–12%Decreasing
This illustrative scenario assumes that the controls described can address 10-30% of discrepancies. That share is assumed to fall by 20-40%. Company data is needed to verify both the addressable share and the resulting change.
To count scheduled but without good reason failed revisions; to show the delay caused by the patient's condition separately.
Part of the explanation for negative feedback on rehabilitation tasks
4–15%Decreasing
Indicative assumption: 15-30% of negative reviews relate to unclearly presented rehabilitation tasks. The solution could reduce this proportion by 25-50%. This is a scenario of potential; assumptions need to be verified by feedback collected by the company.
When a company starts collecting feedback, negative reviews about the explanation of rehabilitation tasks are counted from all evaluations received on the topic. The same method of assessment is applied before and after installation and similar customer groups are compared. Without initial data, the actual change is not determined.
Conditional calculation scenarios. The assumptions have not been validated against client measurements.
When this solution is relevant
- The rehabilitation plan is carried out by several professionals who need to see the same goals and approved changes.
- The patient's progress is recorded separately from the plan, making it difficult to decide what to change in further care.
Implementation requirements
For the rehabilitation plan, the team determines the goals that are important to the patient and appropriate methods of initial and reassessment. The review of home instructions, feedback and plan corrections has clear responsible professionals and deadlines.
Further development options
- Complementary programs and results analysis only after matching their assessment methods and proper comparison.