Organization of rehabilitation services for youth with physical disabilities and mental health problems: A scoping review.
Stephanie Tremblay, Shalini Lal, Lucille Xiang and 2 others
PMID 36891032WHAT IT FOUND
Most rehabilitation services for youth with physical disabilities and mental health needs lack structure.
The review found only two formal models. Key principles like family involvement, care coordination, and staff training were recommended, but their effectiveness was not tested.
Key findings
01Only two formal models of service delivery for co-occurring physical and mental health problems were identified across the reviewed articles.
02Very little information was found about the effectiveness of the identified models and principles, with most articles focusing on recommendations rather than tested interventions.
03Family involvement was the most common key principle found, appearing in 75% of the articles, followed by accessible care and collaboration across institutions.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they found
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The review included only peer-reviewed articles, excluding grey literature that might contain relevant service descriptions. Most included studies were from high-income countries, limiting generalizability to low- and middle-income settings. The review did not assess the quality or effectiveness of the included studies, as is typical for scoping reviews. The population was defined broadly (special healthcare needs), which may dilute findings specific to particular physical disabilities.
Declared interests
The authors declared receiving training awards, research chairs, and bursaries from Canadian health research foundations (FRQS, McGill, Canada Research Chairs). No commercial conflicts were reported.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the identified models or principles as evidence-based treatments. The review explicitly states that very little information exists on their effectiveness, and most recommendations are based on expert opinion or descriptive studies rather than tested interventions.