Integrating rehabilitation into health systems: A comparative study of nine middle-income countries using WHO's Systematic Assessment of Rehabilitation Situation (STARS).

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The need for rehabilitation is growing due to health and demographic trends, especially the rise of non-communicable diseases and the rapid ageing of the global population. However, the extent to which rehabilitation is integrated into health systems is mostly unclear. Our objective is to describe and compare the nature and extent of integration of rehabilitation within health systems across nine middle-income countries using available Systematic Assessment of Rehabilitation Situation (STARS) reports. METHODS: Cross-country comparative study with variable-oriented design using available rehabilitation health system assessment reports from nine middle income countries. FINDINGS: The integration of rehabilitation into health systems is limited across countries. Governance and financing for rehabilitation are mostly established within health ministries but weakly so, while health information systems are characterized by no available data or data that is insufficient or not routinely generated. The overall numbers of rehabilitation workforce per capita are low, with frequent reports of workforce challenges. In most countries the availability of longer-stay, high-intensity rehabilitation is extremely low, the availability of rehabilitation in tertiary hospitals is modest and in government supported primary care its almost non-existent. Multiple concerns about rehabilitation quality arose but the lack of empirical data hinders formal appraisal. CONCLUSION: The study sheds light on the limited integration of rehabilitation in health systems and common areas of difficulty and challenge across nine middle income countries. All countries were found to have a basis on which to strengthen rehabilitation and there were often multiple areas within each health system building block that required action in order to improve the situation. Findings can inform governments, regional and global agencies to support future efforts to strengthen rehabilitation. Additionally, our study demonstrates the value of STARS reports for health policy and systems research and can serve as a model for further comparative studies.

Health equity for persons with disabilities: a global scoping review on barriers and interventions in healthcare services.

BACKGROUND: Persons with disabilities experience health inequities in terms of increased mortality, morbidity, and limitations in functioning when compared to the rest of the population. Many of the poor health outcomes experienced by persons with disabilities cannot be explained by the underlying health condition or impairment, but are health inequities driven by unfair societal and health system factors. A synthesis of the global evidence is needed to identify the factors that hinder equitable access to healthcare services for persons with disabilities, and the interventions to remove these barriers and promote disability inclusion. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review following the methodological framework proposed by Arksey and O'Malley, Int J Soc Res Methodol 8:19-32. We searched two scholarly databases, namely MEDLINE (Ovid) and Web of Science, the websites of Organizations of Persons with Disabilities and governments, and reviewed evidence shared during WHO-led consultations on the topic of health equity for persons with disabilities. We included articles published after 2011 with no restriction to geographical location, the type of underlying impairments or healthcare services. A charting form was developed and used to extract the relevant information for each included article. RESULTS: Of 11,884 articles identified in the search, we included 182 articles in this review. The majority of sources originated from high-income countries. Barriers were identified worldwide across different levels of the health system (such as healthcare costs, untrained healthcare workforces, issues of inclusive and coordinated services delivery), and through wider contributing factors of health inequities that expand beyond the health system (such as societal stigma or health literacy). However, the interventions to promote equitable access to healthcare services for persons with disabilities were not readily mapped onto those needs, their sources of funding and projected sustainability were often unclear, and few offered targeted approaches to address issues faced by marginalized groups of persons with disabilities with intersectional identities. CONCLUSION: Persons with disabilities continue to face considerable barriers when accessing healthcare services, which negatively affects their chances of achieving their highest attainable standard of health. It is encouraging to note the increasing evidence on interventions targeting equitable access to healthcare services, but they remain too few and sparce to meet the populations' needs. Profound systemic changes and action-oriented strategies are warranted to promote health equity for persons with disabilities, and advance global health priorities.

Measurement Properties and Minimal Important Change of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 in Persons With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the measurement properties and minimal important change (MIC) of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) short (12 questions) and full (36 questions) versions in persons with nonspecific low back pain (LBP). DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, APA PsycInfo, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (inception to May 2021). STUDY SELECTION: Eligible studies assessed measurement properties or MIC of WHODAS 2.0 in persons with LBP. DATA EXTRACTION: Paired reviewers screened articles, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using Consensus-Based Standards for Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) and COSMIN-Outcome Measures in Rheumatology checklists. DATA SYNTHESIS: We descriptively synthesized results stratified by measurement property and LBP duration (subacute: 6 weeks to 3 months; chronic: ≥3 months). RESULTS: We screened 297 citations and included 14 studies (reported in 15 articles). Methodological quality of studies was very good for internal consistency and varied between very good and doubtful for construct validity, doubtful for responsiveness, and adequate for all other properties assessed. Evidence suggests that WHODAS 2.0 full version has adequate content validity (2 studies); WHODAS 2.0 short and full versions have adequate structural validity (3 studies), but construct validity is indeterminate (9 studies). WHODAS 2.0 short and full versions have adequate internal consistency (10 studies), and the full version has adequate test-retest and interrater reliability (3 studies) in persons with LBP. Minimal detectable change (MDC) was 10.45-13.99 of 100 for the full version and 8.6 of 48 for the short version in persons with LBP (4 studies). WHODAS 2.0 full version has no floor or ceiling effects, but the short version has potential floor effects in persons with chronic LBP (3 studies). One study estimated MIC for the full version as 4.87 of 100 or 9.74 of 100 (corresponding to 1- and 2-point change on 0- to 10-cm visual analog scale for pain, respectively), and 1 study estimated 3.09-4.68 of 48 for the short version. CONCLUSIONS: In persons with LBP, WHODAS 2.0 full version has adequate content validity, structural validity, internal consistency, and reliability. WHODAS 2.0 short version has adequate structural validity and internal consistency. Construct validity of the short and full versions is indeterminate. Since MDC is estimated to be larger than MIC, users may consider both MIC and MDC thresholds to measure change in functioning for LBP.

Toward Universal Eye Health Coverage-Key Outcomes of the World Health Organization Package of Eye Care Interventions: A Systematic Review.

Importance: Despite persistent inequalities in access to eye care services globally, guidance on a set of recommended, evidence-based eye care interventions to support country health care planning has not been available. To overcome this barrier, the World Health Organization (WHO) Package of Eye Care Interventions (PECI) has been developed. Objective: To describe the key outcomes of the PECI development. Evidence Review: A standardized stepwise approach that included the following stages: (1) selection of priority eye conditions by an expert panel after reviewing epidemiological evidence and health facility data; (2) identification of interventions and related evidence for the selected eye conditions from a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs); stage 2 included a systematic literature search, screening of title and abstracts (excluding articles that were not relevant CPGs), full-text review to assess disclosure of conflicts of interest and affiliations, quality appraisal, and data extraction; (3) expert review of the evidence extracted in stage 2, identification of missed interventions, and agreement on the inclusion of essential interventions suitable for implementation in low- and middle-income resource settings; and (4) peer review. Findings: Fifteen priority eye conditions were chosen. The literature search identified 3601 articles. Of these, 469 passed title and abstract screening, 151 passed full-text screening, 98 passed quality appraisal, and 87 were selected for data extraction. Little evidence (≤1 CPG identified) was available for pterygium, keratoconus, congenital eyelid disorders, vision rehabilitation, myopic macular degeneration, ptosis, entropion, and ectropion. In stage 3, domain-specific expert groups voted to include 135 interventions (57%) of a potential 235 interventions collated from stage 2. After synthesis across all interventions and eye conditions, 64 interventions (13 health promotion and education, 6 screening and prevention, 38 treatment, and 7 rehabilitation) were included in the PECI. Conclusions and Relevance: This systematic review of CPGs for priority eye conditions, followed by an expert consensus procedure, identified 64 essential, evidence-based, eye care interventions that are required to achieve universal eye health coverage. The review identified some important gaps, including a paucity of high-quality, English-language CPGs, for several eye diseases and a dearth of evidence-based recommendations on eye health promotion and prevention within existing CPGs.

Promoting equity in health emergencies through health systems strengthening: lessons learned from disability inclusion in the COVID-19 pandemic.

Discriminatory health systems and inequalities in service provision inevitably create barriers for certain populations in a health emergency. Persons with disabilities have been disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. They commonly experience three increased risks - of contracting the disease, of severe disease or death, and of new or worsening health conditions. These added risks occur due to a range of barriers in the health sector, including physical barriers that prevent access to health facilities and specific interventions; informational barriers that prevent access to health information and/or reduce health literacy; and attitudinal barriers which give rise to stigma and exclusion, all of which add to discrimination and inequality. Furthermore, national health emergency preparedness and planning may fail to consider the needs and priorities of persons with disabilities, in all their diversity, thus leaving them behind in responses. This commentary discusses the importance of inclusive health systems strengthening as a prerequisite for accessible and comprehensive health emergency preparedness and response plans that reach everyone. Lessons learned relating to disability inclusion in the COVID-19 pandemic can inform health systems strengthening in recovery efforts, addressing underlying barriers to access and inclusion, and in turn improving preparedness for future health emergencies.

Framing rehabilitation through health policy and systems research: priorities for strengthening rehabilitation.

BACKGROUND: Recent estimates report that 2.4 billion people with health conditions globally could benefit from rehabilitation. While the benefits of rehabilitation for individuals and society have been described in the literature, many individuals, especially in low- and middle-income countries do not have access to quality rehabilitation. As the need for rehabilitation continues to increase, it is crucial that health systems are adequately prepared to meet this need. Practice- and policy-relevant evidence plays an important role in health systems strengthening efforts. The aim of this paper is to report on the outcome of a global consultative process to advance the development of a research framework to stimulate health policy and systems research (HPSR) for rehabilitation, in order to generate evidence needed by key stakeholders. METHODS: A multi-stakeholder participatory technical consultation was convened by WHO to develop a research framework. This meeting included participants from selected Member States, rehabilitation experts, HPSR experts, public health researchers, civil society and other stakeholders from around the world. The meeting focused on introducing systems approaches to stakeholders and deliberating on priority rehabilitation issues in health systems. Participants were allocated to one of four multi-stakeholder groups with a facilitator to guide the structured technical consultations. Qualitative data in the form of written responses to guiding questions were collected during the structured technical consultations. A technical working group was then established to analyse the data and extract its emerging themes. This informed the development of the HPSR framework for rehabilitation and a selection of preliminary research questions that exemplify how the framework might be used. RESULTS: A total of 123 individuals participated in the multi-stakeholder technical consultations. The elaborated framework is informed by an ecological model and puts forth elements of the six WHO traditional building blocks of the health system, while emphasizing additional components pertinent to rehabilitation, such as political priority, engagement and participatory approaches, and considerations regarding demand and access. Importantly, the framework highlights the multilevel interactions needed across health systems in order to strengthen rehabilitation. Additionally, an initial set of research questions was proposed as a primer for how the framework might be used. CONCLUSIONS: Strengthening health systems to meet the increasing need for rehabilitation will require undertaking more HPSR to inform the integration of rehabilitation into health systems globally. We anticipate that the proposed framework and the emerging research questions will support countries in their quest to increase access to rehabilitation for their populations.

Pre-rehabilitation scores of functioning measured using the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule in persons with nonspecific low back pain: a scoping review.

Knowledge of the pre-rehabilitation generic status of functioning in individuals with low back pain is necessary to understand the clinical utility of rehabilitation care. We conducted a scoping review to describe the pre-rehabilitation functioning status of persons with nonspecific low back pain using the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS)-36 or WHODAS-12. We searched multiple databases from 2010 to 2021 for studies reporting pre-rehabilitation scores using WHODAS in persons with low back pain. Reviewers independently screened articles and extracted data, and we descriptively summarized results by the duration of low back pain (acute/subacute <3 months; chronic ≥3 months), and the WHODAS version. Of 1770 citations screened, eight citations were relevant. Five studies were conducted in Europe, two in America, and one in the African Region (mostly high-income countries). In persons with acute low back pain, the mean WHODAS-36 pre-rehabilitation summary score (complex scoring) was 22.8/100 (SD = 15.4) (one study). In persons with chronic low back pain, the mean WHODAS-36 summary score (complex scoring) ranged from 22.8/100 (SD = 5.7) to 41.5/100 (SD = 13.8) (two studies). For WHODAS-12 in persons with chronic low back pain, the mean summary score was 11.4/48 (SD = 8.7) or 14.4/48 (SD = 9.4) using simple scoring (two studies), and 25.8/100 (SD = 2.2) using complex scoring (one study). No floor or ceiling effects were observed in WHODAS-36 summary scores for chronic low back pain. Our scoping review comprehensively summarizes available studies reporting pre-rehabilitation levels of functioning using WHODAS in persons with low back pain. Persons with low back pain seeking rehabilitation have moderate limitations in functioning, and limitations level tends to be worse with chronic low back pain.

Development of the WHO STARS: A Tool for the Systematic Assessment of Rehabilitation Situation.

OBJECTIVE: To present the development process of the World Health Organization (WHO) Systematic Assessment of Rehabilitation Situation (STARS). DESIGN: A conceptualization phase to establish its objective and identify the content for comprehensively describing rehabilitation in countries, a second phase to draft, and a third phase to refine the tool. Reviews of existing health system assessment (HSA) tools used in other areas of health as well as expert consultations occurred. SETTING: The WHO initiated the development of STARS because there is currently no comprehensive HSA tool for rehabilitation that supports stakeholders describing their country situation and identifying priority actions. PARTICIPANTS: The WHO rehabilitation team, experts representing rehabilitation professions and from all WHO regions, and government and rehabilitation consumer groups. INTERVENTIONS: Conceptualizing, drafting, consulting, and reviewing of the WHO STARS. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Development of a tool that is comprehensive and able to support countries to describe rehabilitation and identify priorities. RESULTS: STARS was developed in a participatory process, uses a logic model to structure the 50 components of rehabilitation selected for assessment, and assesses both capacity and performance. CONCLUSIONS: STARS is the first HSA shaped to rehabilitation, has been developed by the WHO in a participatory process based on several expert consultations, and has the potential to meaningfully support governments to better understand the status of rehabilitation in their countries, define priorities for action to strengthen rehabilitation, and facilitate the monitoring of system level changes. Moreover, STARS information can be used in research to support evidence-informed policy and programs.

WHO Systematic Assessment of Rehabilitation Situation (STARS): Results of the Field Testing in Jordan, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Solomon Islands, Laos, Haiti, and Guyana.

The WHO Systematic Assessment of Rehabilitation Situation (STARS) tool was developed by WHO to facilitate effective prioritization and strategic planning for rehabilitation in countries. The objective of this paper is to present the results of the fourth phase of its development, its field testing in seven countries focusing on its completeness, usefulness, accessibility and feasibility. Field testing occurred in Jordan, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Solomon Islands, Laos, Haiti, and Guyana. Evaluation occurred through structured interviews and rating exercises with 17 government representatives, international consultants, WHO country or regional office staff and rehabilitation experts who were actively engaged and familiar with the STARS assessment and who were knowledgeable of the rehabilitation situation in the countries. STARS was appraised as relevant, complete and accurate in describing the country situation. Areas of inaccuracy were mostly linked to challenges in describing areas of services similarly when significant diversity existed. Feasibility and accessibility were mostly confirmed and more complex components of the tool as well as the guidance to the assessment process were slightly revised in light of the field-testing results. The field testing of WHO STARS confirmed its completeness, usefulness, accessibility and feasibility, and concerns raised by the interviews informed the last refinement of the tool. STARS is part of the WHO Rehabilitation in Health Systems-Guide for Action, available online, by September 2021, STARS had guided 21 country situation assessments.

Disability and COVID-19: ensuring no one is left behind.

The United Nations' Sustainable Development Agenda calls for targeted attention to the needs and rights of the most vulnerable populations to ensure a life of dignity and human security for all. In this paper, we argue that persons with disabilities are in a disproportionately vulnerable situation in public health emergencies. By using the example of Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), we explain why that is and call for the systematic consideration of the needs and rights of persons with disabilities during the response to the outbreak and during the recovery phase. Otherwise, equity will continue to be merely an aspiration during this COVID-19 emergency - as it will in future health emergencies.

Keeping an eye on eye care: monitoring progress towards effective coverage.

The eye care sector is well positioned to contribute to the advancement of universal health coverage within countries. Given the large unmet need for care associated with cataract and refractive error, coupled with the fact that highly cost-effective interventions exist, we propose that effective cataract surgery coverage (eCSC) and effective refractive error coverage (eREC) serve as ideal indicators to track progress in the uptake and quality of eye care services at the global level, and to monitor progress towards universal health coverage in general. Global targets for 2030 for these two indicators were endorsed by WHO Member States at the 74th World Health Assembly in May, 2021. To develop consensus on the data requirements and methods of calculating eCSC and eREC, WHO convened a series of expert consultations to make recommendations for standardising the definitions and measurement approaches for eCSC and eREC and to identify areas in which future work is required.

Global estimates of the need for rehabilitation based on the Global Burden of Disease study 2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019.

BACKGROUND: Rehabilitation has often been seen as a disability-specific service needed by only few of the population. Despite its individual and societal benefits, rehabilitation has not been prioritised in countries and is under-resourced. We present global, regional, and country data for the number of people who would benefit from rehabilitation at least once during the course of their disabling illness or injury. METHODS: To estimate the need for rehabilitation, data from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2019 were used to calculate the prevalence and years of life lived with disability (YLDs) of 25 diseases, impairments, or bespoke aggregations of sequelae that were selected as amenable to rehabilitation. All analyses were done at the country level and then aggregated to seven regions: World Bank high-income countries and the six WHO regions (ie, Africa, the Americas, Southeast Asia, Europe, Eastern Mediterranean, and Western Pacific). FINDINGS: Globally, in 2019, 2·41 billion (95% uncertainty interval 2·34-2·50) individuals had conditions that would benefit from rehabilitation, contributing to 310 million [235-392] YLDs. This number had increased by 63% from 1990 to 2019. Regionally, the Western Pacific had the highest need of rehabilitation services (610 million people [588-636] and 83 million YLDs [62-106]). The disease area that contributed most to prevalence was musculoskeletal disorders (1·71 billion people [1·68-1·80]), with low back pain being the most prevalent condition in 134 of the 204 countries analysed. INTERPRETATION: To our knowledge, this is the first study to produce a global estimate of the need for rehabilitation services and to show that at least one in every three people in the world needs rehabilitation at some point in the course of their illness or injury. This number counters the common view of rehabilitation as a service required by only few people. We argue that rehabilitation needs to be brought close to communities as an integral part of primary health care to reach more people in need. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Development and Validation of the WHO Rehabilitation Competency Framework: A Mixed Methods Study.

OBJECTIVES: To identify the competencies, behaviors, activities, and tasks required by the rehabilitation workforce, and their core values and beliefs, and to validate these among rehabilitation professionals and service users. DESIGN: Mixed methods study, involving a content analysis of rehabilitation-related competency frameworks, a modified Delphi study, and a consultation-based questionnaire of service users. SETTING: Desk-based research. PARTICIPANTS: Participants who completed the first (N=77; 47%) and second (N=68; 67%) iterations of the modified Delphi study. Thirty-seven individuals participated in the service user consultation. Collectively, the participants of the mixed methods study represented a significant range of rehabilitation professions from a broad range of countries, as well as both high- and low-income settings. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Not applicable. RESULTS: The mixed methods study resulted in the inclusion of 4 core values, 4 core beliefs, 17 competencies, 56 behaviors, 20 activities, and 62 tasks in the Rehabilitation Competency Framework. The content analysis of rehabilitation-related competency frameworks produced an alpha list of competencies, behaviors, activities and tasks ("statements"), which were categorized into 5 domains. The final iteration of the modified Delphi study revealed an average of 95% agreement with the statements, whereas the service user consultation indicated an average of 87% agreement with the statements included in the questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the diverse composition of the rehabilitation workforce, this mixed methods study demonstrated that a strong consensus on competencies and behaviors that are shared across professions, specializations, and settings, and for activities and tasks that collectively capture the scope of rehabilitation practice. The development of the Rehabilitation Competency Framework is a pivotal step toward the twin goals of building workforce capability to improve quality of care and strengthening a common rehabilitation workforce identity that will bolster its visibility and influence at a systems-level.

Toward Strengthening Rehabilitation in Health Systems: Methods Used to Develop a WHO Package of Rehabilitation Interventions.

Achieving Universal Health Coverage (UHC) is a World Health Organization (WHO) strategic priority. UHC means "all people receive quality health services that meet their needs without being exposed to financial hardship in paying for the services." Rehabilitation is among the services included in UHC. As part of the WHO Rehabilitation 2030 call for action, WHO is developing its Package of Rehabilitation Interventions (PRI) to support ministries of health in planning, budgeting, and integrating rehabilitation interventions into health systems. The aim of this paper is to introduce and describe the PRI and its methodology. An advisory board composed of members from different WHO departments is overseeing the project, which is led by the WHO Rehabilitation Programme in collaboration with Cochrane Rehabilitation. The development of the PRI is conducted in 6 steps: (1) selection of health conditions (for which rehabilitation interventions will be included in the PRI) based on prevalences, related levels of disability, and expert opinion; (2) identification of rehabilitation interventions and related evidence for the selected health conditions from Clinical Practice Guidelines and Cochrane Reviews; (3) expert agreement on the inclusion of rehabilitation interventions in the PRI; (4) description of resources required for the provision of selected interventions; (5) peer review process, and (6) production of an open source web-based tool. Rehabilitation experts and consumers from all world regions will collaborate in the different steps. In developing the PRI, WHO is taking an important step toward strengthening rehabilitation in health systems, thus enabling more people to benefit from rehabilitation.

Awareness, attitudes, and beliefs about music-induced hearing loss: Towards the development of a health communication strategy to promote safe listening.

OBJECTIVE: Worldwide, 1.1 billion young people are at risk of developing hearing loss due to unsafe listening. The World Health Organization plans a global health campaign to promote behavior change. In an effort to develop effective evidence-based interventions, this study identifies modifiable factors that influence listening habits. METHODS: Online survey among 1019 individuals aged 18-35. The questionnaire was based on theories of behavior change. RESULTS: Individuals not contemplating change showed a lack of knowledge, tended not to feel particularly at risk, and did not see the benefits of preventive measures. Conversely, those considering a change perceived more barriers (e.g., lack of information on how to act,). Self-efficacy was shown to play an ambivalent role. CONCLUSION: Four factors that can be influenced by a health communication intervention were identified: risk perception, perceived safe listening level due to a lack of symptoms, knowledge, and perceived benefits and barriers, in particular perceived loss of pleasure. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The first aspects can be influenced through health communication interventions. Influencing the perceived loss of pleasure additionally requires an analysis of competing pressures. To support and not exceedingly burden the individual, we further suggest to address environmental aspects (e.g., policies).

Needs and unmet needs for rehabilitation services: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: There is a global demand for rehabilitation services but to date little attention has been paid to rehabilitation as part of the health agenda, especially in low- and middle-income countries. The objective of the scoping review was to get an overview of the needs and unmet needs for rehabilitation services described in the literature. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Electronic search was performed in PubMed and REHABDATA for studies published between 2000 and 2017. RESULTS: Eighty-six articles met the inclusion criteria. Results revealed a profound need for rehabilitation among different user groups with non-communicable diseases and injuries across countries. However, this need considerably outstripped the provision of services, which left many people with substantial unmet needs for rehabilitation. The main reasons for the unmet needs for rehabilitation were the absence of or unequal geographical distribution of services within a country, lack of transportation, and unaffordability of the services. CONCLUSIONS: There are substantial unmet needs for rehabilitation and numerous barriers to accessing services. Efforts need to focus on building the capacity for rehabilitation research predominantly in low- and middle-income countries. The comprehensive data that this review provides is useful for raising awareness for the need of rehabilitation at policy level. Implications for rehabilitation There is a profound need for rehabilitation services due to the ageing population and growing prevalence of non-communicable diseases. This scoping review shows that the need for rehabilitation considerably outstrips the provision of services. There are substantial unmet needs for rehabilitation and numerous barriers to accessing services. Concerted global action to scale up quality rehabilitation services is needed, especially in low- and middle-income countries.