Future Steps
Already an abundance of literature has been written on the topic of CBR, providing a rich foundation for future investment and growth. Examples include:
In spite of this progress in understanding, CBR has been challenged by a number of legitimate criticisms over the years. Click on the modules below to see what some stakeholders have to say.
- A literature review conducted by WHO, ILO, UNESCO, and IDDC observed that CBR programs result in greater independence, mobility, and communication skills for persons with disabilities, greater participation of persons with disabilities, and increased incomes due to economic interventions included in the CBR model; CBR was also suggested to be cost-effective (Hartley, Finkenflügel, Kuipers, & Thomas, 2009).
- Based on a review of 29 studies (1987-2007), CBR programs were found to increase the coping ability of caregivers, enable school attendance of approximately 50% of children with disability identified, and increase social integration of at least 50% of persons with disability in each study; economic interventions helped to support the incomes of persons with disabilities and build self-esteem; community attitudes were more accepting and communications with persons with disability were improved (Velema, Ebenso, & Fuzikawa, 2008).
- In a review of methods of integrating primary health care and rehabilitation care models, McColl et al. (2009) recognized the merits of CBR as a viable alternative to institutional or professionally dominated care. CBR has the potential to heighten awareness of disability issues and achieve broader results than clinical care.
- Individual studies have found that CBR boosts positive attitudes towards persons with disabilities and enhances access to rehabilitation care (eg. Cheausuwantavee, 2007).
In spite of this progress in understanding, CBR has been challenged by a number of legitimate criticisms over the years. Click on the modules below to see what some stakeholders have to say.
References:
Cheausuwantavee, T. (2007). Beyond community based rehabilitation: Consciousness and meaning. Asia Pacific Disability Rehabilitation Journal, 18(1), 101-109.
Hartley, S., Finkenflügel, H., Kuipers, P., & Thomas, M. (2009). Community-based rehabilitation: Opportunity and challenge. Lancet, 374(9704), 1803-1804.
McColl, M. A., Shortt, S., Godwin, M., Smith, K., Rowe, K., O’Brien, P., Donnelly, C. (2009). Models for integrating rehabilitation and primary care: A scoping study. Archives of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, 90(9), 1523-1531.
Velema, J. P., Ebenso, B., & Fuzikawa, P. L. (2008). Evidence for the effectiveness of rehabilitation-in-the-community programmes. Leprosy Review, 79(1), 65-82.
Cheausuwantavee, T. (2007). Beyond community based rehabilitation: Consciousness and meaning. Asia Pacific Disability Rehabilitation Journal, 18(1), 101-109.
Hartley, S., Finkenflügel, H., Kuipers, P., & Thomas, M. (2009). Community-based rehabilitation: Opportunity and challenge. Lancet, 374(9704), 1803-1804.
McColl, M. A., Shortt, S., Godwin, M., Smith, K., Rowe, K., O’Brien, P., Donnelly, C. (2009). Models for integrating rehabilitation and primary care: A scoping study. Archives of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, 90(9), 1523-1531.
Velema, J. P., Ebenso, B., & Fuzikawa, P. L. (2008). Evidence for the effectiveness of rehabilitation-in-the-community programmes. Leprosy Review, 79(1), 65-82.
