Assessment of Rehabilitation Infrastructure in Peru.

The results are mainly from large public hospitals in urban Lima, so they do not describe smaller health centers, rural areas, or all of Peru. The online survey had about a 20% response rate, and the authors say this could increase bias. Online responders may have been more cooperative and better able to answer the survey questions than non-responders. Answers were self-reported by clinical staff, not verified with records or independent data. Some hospital-level questions would have been more accurate if answered by management or administration staff. The survey covered only four of six WHO building blocks and did not assess Leadership and Governance or Finance. The study did not compare public and private hospitals or rural and urban areas. Percentages may be influenced by how many respondents came from each hospital, because hospital size varied. Respondents were largely physicians and PTs, so they may not have known about services outside their own discipline. The survey did not record patient population size or set targets for how many staff or services a hospital needs, so adequacy could not be judged. It did not measure patient outcomes, so it cannot show whether task sharing or delays affected recovery.

The authors declared no conflicts of interest. The publication types list Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural and Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't.

Do not read these results as a national picture of Peru's rehabilitation system or as proof that PTs should take over OT and SLP roles. The survey was mainly from large public hospitals in urban Peru, relied on self-report, and did not assess patient outcomes.