The Impact of Social Economics and Cultural Factors on Accessibility and Perception of Rehabilitation in Mainland China

Abstract

Research Objectives To understand the differences of family backgrounds between the two identified regions. To explore the impact of regional, cultural, and socio-economic differences on accessibility and people's perception of rehabilitation medicine. Design An online survey collected demographic information from parents of children attending two rehabilitation centers in two regions that are distinctively different culturally and socio-economically. Setting The two identified facilities are owned by the government, receive funding from the central and local Disabled People Federations, and serve children from two to fourteen years old with various disabilities. Participants Participants are caregivers of children who were receiving rehabilitation services at the two identified rehabilitation centers. A total of 104 participants from the two identified regions completed the online survey. Interventions The survey questions focused on the patients’ family background, including their ethnicity, regions of residency and social-economic status, as well as the parents’ perception of rehabilitation services. Main Outcome Measures The survey study data was collected, processed, and analyzed in REDCap. Descriptive statistics were generated to provide an overview of the demographic differences and report service barriers. Statistical analysis was performed on R Studio (RStudio Team, 2020) to compare findings between the two respondent groups. Results The survey results demonstrated that there were a few major differences between the two regions including ethnicities, educational levels, household income, and perception of rehabilitation. Participants’ perception of the development of rehabilitation, impact factors, and types of therapies vary between the two regions. Conclusions In comparing the differences between the two regions, the east region that was more culturally open and economically developed had better access to rehabilitation services. Participants from the east region also put their hope of change on a systematic level instead of individual level. The results suggest the need for further conversations and deeper understanding on how regional, cultural, and social-economic differences affect participants' experiences and perceptions. Author(s) Disclosures The authors received no financial support for the research authorship, and/or publication of this article. To understand the differences of family backgrounds between the two identified regions. To explore the impact of regional, cultural, and socio-economic differences on accessibility and people's perception of rehabilitation medicine. An online survey collected demographic information from parents of children attending two rehabilitation centers in two regions that are distinctively different culturally and socio-economically. The two identified facilities are owned by the government, receive funding from the central and local Disabled People Federations, and serve children from two to fourteen years old with various disabilities. Participants are caregivers of children who were receiving rehabilitation services at the two identified rehabilitation centers. A total of 104 participants from the two identified regions completed the online survey. The survey questions focused on the patients’ family background, including their ethnicity, regions of residency and social-economic status, as well as the parents’ perception of rehabilitation services. The survey study data was collected, processed, and analyzed in REDCap. Descriptive statistics were generated to provide an overview of the demographic differences and report service barriers. Statistical analysis was performed on R Studio (RStudio Team, 2020) to compare findings between the two respondent groups. The survey results demonstrated that there were a few major differences between the two regions including ethnicities, educational levels, household income, and perception of rehabilitation. Participants’ perception of the development of rehabilitation, impact factors, and types of therapies vary between the two regions. In comparing the differences between the two regions, the east region that was more culturally open and economically developed had better access to rehabilitation services. Participants from the east region also put their hope of change on a systematic level instead of individual level. The results suggest the need for further conversations and deeper understanding on how regional, cultural, and social-economic differences affect participants' experiences and perceptions.