{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.023104693140794223, 'fraction_numerical': 0.009386281588447653, 'mean_word_length': 5.6291866028708135, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Rehabilitation from the patient perspective--a qualitative analysis of the treatment beliefs of patients in inpatient orthopedic and psychosomatic rehabilitation].

PURPOSE
As the common sense self-regulation model (CSM) was further developed in the late 1990s, its focus was, along with subjective illness perceptions, the treatment representations of patients, in particular medication-related perceptions. However until now, only few studies have dealt with subjective concepts regarding non-medication treatment. The objective of this study was to explore the core content areas of the treatment concept of rehabilitation patients as a basis for developing a questionnaire to survey rehabilitation-related treatment beliefs.


METHODS
In 5 inpatient rehabilitation centres for psychosomatic and musculoskeletal diseases, guided focus groups were conducted with a total of n=25 rehabilitation patients. Some 56% of the participants were female; the average age was 52.8 years (SD=10.8). The interviews were transcribed and analyzed using the computer programme Atlas.ti based on the method recommended by Mayring in a multi-stage qualitative content analysis procedure.


RESULTS
In the analysis of the discussion transcriptions, a total of 579 patient statements were categorized with 49 codes that were assigned to the areas (1) expectations and beliefs with respect to the rehabilitation process, (2) expectations of results, and (3) fears associated with rehabilitation. The process expectations were the most frequently discussed topic, constituting 58.2% of all patient statements. It was found that the patients associate not only numerous individual treatments with rehabilitation but also have concrete perceptions about the specific form rehabilitation should have, their own role in the rehabilitation process, and features of the overall rehabilitation concept. The outcome expectations are related to the areas activities of daily life and job, psyche, soma, and effectiveness of rehabilitation. Fears with respect to rehabilitation generally played only a subordinate role for those surveyed. The indication-specific analyses showed that the perceptions regarding the realization and form of rehabilitation differed among the various diagnosis groups, but the patients named similar categories for expectations of results and fears, with only some variation in importance.


CONCLUSION
The focus groups allowed good insights into the patient perspectives of rehabilitation. Simultaneously, a good basis was created for generating contents of items for a questionnaire on the rehabilitative treatment concept, so that along with literature analyses, the qualitative method proved to be a suitable approach and good source for developing a questionnaire.