Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine: Special Issue 50-4bokBW | Page 30

332
C. Gutenbrunner and B. Nugraha
national rehabilitation services seek guidance and
advice. The WHO provides such advice to national
governments on request, in collaboration with
NGOs in official relation with the WHO Disability
and Rehabilitation Team (1). These missions must
be based on sound information about relevant
factors, as well as a systematic approach in order
to identify gaps and to recommend activities re-
garding how to close the gaps (1).
In performing such missions, the problem occurs
as to how to collect all relevant data on a sound
basis. This, on the one hand, must be done on the
basis searching available sources of information
(reports, statistics, publications and others). More
detailed information can be collected through coun-
try visits and stakeholder interviews. However, it
is important to check systematically whether all
relevant information is available and what remains
to be investigated. Secondly, it is helpful if the
information is available prior to the country visit.
As no such checklists have been available,
the authors designed a preliminary checklist of
relevant information based on the 6 health sys-
tem building blocks (12). This preliminary RSAT
checklist was tested in 2 rehabilitation service
implementation advisory missions (5, 6) and was
shown to be feasible and helpful for the develop-
ment of NDHRPs. However, in using the checklist,
some points that would improve the quality of the
list were identified.
As a second step, a questionnaire was deve-
loped, using the Ear and Hearing Care Situation
Analysis Tool (15) as a blueprint. This ques-
tionnaire (RSAT) should enable the collection of
information from governments or experts from the
county of the national WHO offices. It was tested
in a mission (in the Democratic People’s Republic
of Korea (7)) and was shown to be useful. Further
testing and evaluation of outcomes is needed.
CONCLUSION
This paper used a pragmatic approach to develo-
ping checklists and questionnaires for collecting
all relevant information to develop NDHRPs.
Testing of these instruments in different missions
has shown that the principles work well, and that
the tools are feasible and helpful. However, further
testing is important and the development of an
internationally agreed tool should be promoted. It
www.medicaljournals.se/jrm
is hoped that the work presented here will be useful
as the basis for future developments.
REFERENCES
1. Gutenbrunner CBJ, Lains J, Melvin J, Nugraha B.
Strengthening health-related rehabilitation servi-
ces at the national level. J Rehabil Med 2018; 50:
317–325.
2. World Health Organization. Everybody’s business
strengthening health systems to improve health
outcomes: WHO’s framework for action. Geneva:
WHO, 2007.
3. World Health Organization. Monitoring the building
blocks of health systems: a handbook of indicators
and their measurement strategies. Geneva: World
Health Organization; 2010.
4. World Health Organization. Global Disability Ac-
tion Plan. Geneva: World Health Organization;
2014. Available from: http://apps.who.int/iris/
bitstream/10665/199544/1/9789241509619_eng.
pdf?ua=1.
5. Gutenbrunner C TP, Grabljevec K, Nugraha B. Re-
sponding to the WHO Global Disability Action Plan in
Ukraine: WHO Advisory Mission to develop a National
Disability, Health and Rehabilitation Plan. J Rehabil
Med 2018; 50: 338–341.
6. Gutenbrunner C, Nugraha B. Responding to the WHO
Global Disability Action Plan in Egypt: WHO Technical
Consultancy to develop a National Disability, Health
and Rehabilitation Plan. J Rehabil Med 2018; 50:
333–337.
7. Nugraha B, Gutenbrunner C. Responding to the WHO
Global Disability Action Plan in Democratic People’s
Republic of Korea. J Rehabil Med 2018; 50: 342–345.
8. World Health Organization, The World Bank. World
report on disability. Geneva: World Health Organi-
zation; 2011.
9. OECD, Eurostat, WHO. A system of health ac-
counts. Cedex, Paris: Oecd Publishing; 2011.
doi:10.1787/9789264116016-en. Available from:
http://www.who.int/health-accounts/methodology/
sha2011.pdf.
10. Gutenbrunner C, Bickenbach J, Kiekens C, Meyer
T, Skempes D, Nugraha B, et al. ISPRM discussion
paper: proposing dimensions for an International
Classification System for Service Organization in
Health–related Rehabilitation. J Rehabil Med 2015;
47: 809–815.
11. Meyer T, Gutenbrunner C, Bickenbach J, Cieza A,
Melvin J, Stucki G. Towards a conceptual description
of rehabilitation as a health strategy. J Rehabil Med
2011; 43: 765–769.
12. World Health Organization. Monitoring and evaluation
of health system strengthening: opeartional fram-
ework. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2009.
13. Brady B, Veljanova I, Chipchase L. Are multidiscipli-
nary interventions multicultural? A topical review of
the pain literature as it relates to culturally diverse
patient groups. Pain 2016; 157: 321–328.
14. Good DV M-J GB, Becker AE. The culture of medicine
and racial, ethnic and class disparities in health care.
Washington: National Academies Press; 2003.
15. World Health Organization. Ear and hearing care
situation analysis tool. Geneva: World Health Or-
ganization; 2015.
16. World Health Organization. Rehabilitation guidelines.
[cited 28 Feb 2017]. Geneva: World Health Organi-
zation; 2017. Available from: http://www.who.int/