《中国康复理论与实践》 ›› 2007, Vol. 13 ›› Issue (04): 368-370.

• 临床研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

需求评估对辅助器具补助政策的启示

范佳进1; 钟磊1; 朱图陵1,2; 赫琳1; 陈晓帆1   

  1. 1.深圳市伤残人用具资源中心,广东深圳市 518029;2.中国康复研究中心,北京市 100068
  • 收稿日期:2007-03-07 出版日期:2007-04-01 发布日期:2007-04-01

Reflections of the Subsidy Policy Regarding Assistive Devices Based on Needs Assessments on Persons with Disability

FAN Jia-jin,ZHONG Lei, ZHU Tu-ling, et al   

  1. Resource Center of Assistive Technology in Shenzhen, Shenzhen 518029, Guangdong, China
  • Received:2007-03-07 Published:2007-04-01 Online:2007-04-01

摘要: 目的通过残疾人需求评估分析年龄、残疾类别、残疾等级三者与辅助器具需求之间的关系,为辅助器具配送和补助政策的制定提供科学化建议。方法由专业评估人员对对深圳市六个区928名新持证残疾人进行康复需求评估,并录入ACCESS数据库进行统计分析。结果不同残疾类别对辅助器具的需求率依次为:视力残疾78%、听力残疾76%、肢体残疾74%,言语、智力和精神残疾的需求率均较低;视力、听力和肢体残疾人不同年龄段对辅助器具的需求不同;视力、听力、肢体残疾不同等级中,视力残疾越轻需求率越高,听力二级残疾需求率最高,肢体一、二级残疾需求率均较高。结论在制定残疾人辅助器具配送补助政策时,需考虑残疾类别、残疾者年龄和残疾等级,针对不同年龄段的康复目标配送辅助器具,根据残疾等级配送必要数量的辅助器具。

关键词: 辅助器具, 需求评估, 补助政策

Abstract: Objective To analyze the relationship between needs of assistive devices and the three other factors (age, disability categories, severity levels of disability) in order to scientifically formulate subsidy policy on assistive devices.MethodsThe assessment of rehabilitation needs for 928 Shenzhen citizens with new disability certificates in its six districts was performed by professionals, and the data was recorded into ACCESS database and analyzed.ResultsThe sequence of demand rates on assistive devices among disability categories was vision disability (78%), hearing disability (76%) and physical disability (74%); but speech, mental retardation and psychological disabilities had a low demand. The demand rates of assistive devices were dissimilar among four age groups for persons with vision, hearing and physical disabilities; for severity levels of three disability categories of vision, hearing and physical disabilities: the milder the vision disability was, the greater demand rates of assistive devices were; the demand rate of those with the second level of hearing disability was the highest; the demand rates of persons with the first and second levels of physical disability were relatively higher.ConclusionWhen drawing up subsidy policy on assistive devices for persons with disability, the disability categories, ages of persons with disability and severity levels of disability should be considered; the different types of assistive devices should be supplied according to rehabilitation goals at different age group; and necessary assistive devices should be provided according to severity levels of disability.

Key words: assistive devices, needs assessments, subsidy policy