Author
Abstract
It highlights the rehabilitation outcome variability being measured and influences how recovery pathways areevaluated and compared. Access for postoperative rehabilitation services and continuity of care at discharge is significantlyaffected by institutional and socioeconomic factors. The aim of this study was to identify the level of rehabilitationeffectiveness and its five dimensions namely accessibility, adherence, functional recovery, patient satisfaction, and costefficiency in postoperative cervical spine patients in Uzbekistan. The main purpose of this study was to explore patients’perceptions of their rehabilitation experiences and treatment outcomes within their early years as postoperative patients.This study used quantitative design involving an iterative process of analytical cycles: model specification, estimation,validation and refinement. A total of 120 patients from urban hospitals and home settings were purposely selected andsurveyed to obtain their feedback on the rehabilitation programs they received before and after their discharge andthe strategies that they employed within their recovery management process. The results indicate that the combinedapproach adopted in this research reasonably enabled patients to be actively engaged in their recovery process andimproved functional outcomes among them. The resultant structural equation model showed a better fit to the data,providing support for the integrated application of the Heckman selection model. The findings and the implications forthe improvement of patients’ rehabilitation outcomes are discussed. This study provides some theoretical and practicalimplications for improving the patients’ recovery outcomes and their long-term development which aim to enhance thehealthcare qualities of future rehabilitation programs.
Suggested Citation
Shokhrukh Ziyavaddinov, 2026.
"Comparison Of Hospital-Based And Home-Based Rehabilitation After Cervical Spine Surgery In Uzbekistan,"
GREEN ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT, "Ma'rifat-Print-Media" LLC, Tashkent State University of Economics, vol. 4(5), May.
Handle:
RePEc:teu:ged000:v:4:y:2026:i:5:id:10454
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.20203824
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:teu:ged000:v:4:y:2026:i:5:id:10454. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Xayrulla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://yashil-iqtisodiyot-taraqqiyot.uz/journal/index.php/GED .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.