Cognitive Rehabilitation During the Industrialization of Rehabilitation

  • Leonard Diller
Part of the Critical Issues in Neuropsychology book series (CINP)

Abstract

A maxim is a simple, universally accepted truth. For example, in medicine there is a maxim: “Above all do no harm”; in economics: “There is no free lunch”; in literature: “In the beginning was the word”; and in rehabilitation one might say: “Do what you have to do to optimize the functioning of the patient,” with a proviso of “Do not violate the other maxims.” If one does no harm, tries to make a citizen with a handicap a productive taxpayer or relieve someone of a burden that hopefully can be translated in economic terms, and writes a clean report to a third-party payer, then all participants will be happy: the patient, the sponsoring agency, and the provider of services. But if one should stray from any one of these maxims, then one of the parties in rehabilitation will be offended and trouble follows.

Keywords

Physical Medicine Professional Group Functional Independence Measure Cognitive Rehabilitation Primary Stakeholder 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baddeley, A. D. (1993). A theory of rehabilitation without a model of learning is a vehicle without an engine: A comment on Caramazza and Hillis. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 3, 235–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berkowitz, E. (1991). The federal government and the emergence of rehabilitation medicine. The Historian, 43, 530–544.Google Scholar
  3. Caplan, A. L., Callahan, D., & Haas, J. (1987). Ethical and policy issues in rehabilitation medicine. A Hastings Center Report: Special supplement. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 68, 7–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cervelli, L. (1997). The missing link; structured dialogue between payer and provider communities on the costs and benefits of medical rehabilitation. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 78 ( Suppl. S3 ), S36 - S38.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Corrigan, J. D., Smith-Knapp, K., & Granger, C. V. (1997). Validity of the Functional Independence Measure for persons with traumatic brain injury. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 78, 828–834.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. deLateur, B. J. (1997) Quality of life; a patient centered outcome. The 29th Walter J. Zeiter Lecture. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 3 (78), 237–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Diller, L. (1990). Fostering the interdisciplinary team, fostering research in a society in transition. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 71, 275–278.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Diller, L., Goodgold, J., & Kay, T. (1989). Final report to NIDRR for the Rehabilitation Research and Training Center in Head Trauma and Stroke. New York: Department of Rehabilitation Medicine New York University Medical Center.Google Scholar
  9. Dittmar, S. S., & Gresham, G. E. (1997). Functional assessment and outcome measures for the rehabilitation health health professional. Frederick, MD: Aspen.Google Scholar
  10. Duggan, C. H., Djikers, M., Tate, D., & Heinrich, R. (1997). Quality of life of persons with spinal cord injuries; an analysis based on personal narrative. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 78, 910.Google Scholar
  11. Evans, R. W. (1997). Postacute neurorehabilitation; Roles and responsibilities within a national information system. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 78, (Suppl. 4), 17–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Frederickson, N., & Cannon, N. L. (1995). The role of the rehabilitation physician in the postacute continuum. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 76, 17–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fuhrer, M. J., Rentala, D. H., Hart, K. A. Clearman, R., & Young, M. E. (1992), Relationship of life satisfaction to impairment, disability, and handicap among persons with spinal cord injury living in the community. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 73, 552–557.Google Scholar
  14. Gelfman, R., Peters, J., Opitz, J. L., & Folz, T. J. (1997). The history of physical medicine and rehabilitation as recorded in the diary of DR Frank Krusen: Part 3. Consolidating the position (1948–1953). Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 78, 556–561.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Haas, J. F. (1988). Admission to rehabilitation centers: Selection of patients. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 68, 329–332.Google Scholar
  16. Hoyer, T. (1998). Quoted in “Say goodbye to functional related groups, hello to MDS and RUGS.” Rehabilitation Continuum Report, 7, 1.Google Scholar
  17. Keith, R. A. (1991). The comprehensive treatment team in rehabilitation. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 72, 269–274.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Keith, R. A. (1997). Treatment strength in rehabilitation. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 78, 1298–1304.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Keith, R. A., Wilson, D. B., & Guitierrez, P. (1995). Acute and subacute rehabilitation for stroke: A comparison. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 76, 495–500.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Malec, J. F., & Basford, J. S. (1996). Postacute brain injury rehabilitation. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 77, 198–207.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Opitz, J. L., Folz, T. J., Peters, J., & Gelfman, R. (1997). The history of physical medicine and rehabilitation as recorded in the diaries of Frank Krusen: Part 1: Gathering momentum (the years before 1942). Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 78, 442–445.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Reilly, T. A. (1997). Management dilemmas in rehabilitation today. Rehabilitation Outlook, 2, 2–4.Google Scholar
  23. Seligman, M. E. P. (1996). Science as an ally of practice. American Psychologist, 51, 1072–1079.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Webb, C. D., Wrigley, M., Yoels, W., & Fine, P. (1995). Explaining quality of life for persons with traumatic brain injuries 2 years after brain injury. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 76, 1113–1118.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wilson, B. A. (1997). Cognitive rehabilitation: How it is and how it might be. Journal of International Neuropsychology Society, 3, 487–496Google Scholar
  26. Wong, E. H. (1997). How to avoid an adversarial alliance with families in acute brain injury rehabilitation: Simple guidelines from clinical observations. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 77, 945–948.Google Scholar
  27. Zarin, D. A., Pincus, H. A., West, J. C., & McIntyre, J. S. (1997). Practiced based research in psychiatry. American Journal of Psychiatry, 154 (9), 1199–1208.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leonard Diller
    • 1
  1. 1.Rusk Institute of Rehabilitation MedicineNew York University Medical CenterNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations