This methodological paper identifies rehabilitation priorities in Uganda, suggesting improvements for access to services.
The 2024 National Population and Housing Census documented that 5.5 million persons over the age of two in Uganda are living with a disability and could benefit from rehabilitation. Understanding the factors contributing to limited access to rehabilitation services, how these services are being delivered in Uganda, and what the priorities are related to physical rehabilitation is necessary before developing new rehabilitation interventions or community-based rehabilitation programs. In this methodological paper, we explain how a participatory approach was used to collectively define and identify rehabilitation priorities and how this approach will inform the development of accessible physical rehabilitation interventions within the Kasese District. First, we completed an environmental scan of relevant rehabilitation literature to identify what existed, then we conducted virtual meetings with team members in Canada and Uganda to share knowledge around current physical rehabilitation needs and identify research gaps in service delivery. Finally, we hosted community-led in-person meetings with people living with a disability to identify and define rehabilitation priorities to improve access to basic rehabilitation services in Kasese, Uganda. The use of a participatory approach led to mutual learning opportunities and capacity building between community-based health workers from a lower-income country and academics from a higher-income country. It facilitated the development of international partnerships and the co-creation of action-based rehabilitation research priorities. Our priorities, based on the needs of persons living with a disability in the Kasese District of Uganda, will inform the development of future community-based rehabilitation projects.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
O'Neil et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: