title: [Development of a consented set of criteria to evaluate post-rehabilitation support services].
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  Existing rehabilitation aftercare offers in Germany are heterogeneous, and there is a lack of transparency in terms of indications and methods as well as of (nationwide) availability and financial coverage. Also, there is no systematic and transparent synopsis. To close this gap a systematic review was conducted and a web-based database created for post-rehabilitation support. To allow a consistent assessment of the included aftercare offers, a quality profile of universally valid criteria was developed. This paper aims to outline the scientific approach.
  
  
  METHODS
  The procedure adapts the RAND/UCLA method, with the participation of the advisory board of the ReNa project. Preparations for the set included systematic searches in order to find possible criteria to assess the quality of aftercare offers. These criteria first were collected without any pre-selection involved. Every item of the adjusted collection was evaluated by every single member of the advisory board considering the topics "relevance", "feasibility" and "suitability for public coverage". Interpersonal analysis was conducted by relating the median and classification into consensus and dissent. All items that were considered to be "relevant" and "feasible" in the three stages of consensus building and deemed "suitable for public coverage" were transferred into the final set of criteria (ReNa set).
  
  
  RESULTS
  A total of 82 publications were selected out of the 656 findings taken into account, which delivered 3,603 criteria of possible initial relevance. After a further removal of 2,598 redundant criteria, the panel needed to assess a set of 1,005 items. Finally we performed a quality assessment of aftercare offers using a set of 35 descriptive criteria merged into 8 conceptual clusters.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The consented ReNa set of 35 items delivers a first generally valid tool to describe quality of structures, standards and processes of aftercare offers. So finally, the project developed into a complete collection of profiles characterizing each post-rehabilitation support service included in the database.
authors.affiliation: Institut für Sozialmedizin und Epidemiologie der Universität Lübeck, Deutschland.
authors.forename: Susanne
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Parzanka
authors.affiliation: Institut für Sozialmedizin und Epidemiologie der Universität Lübeck, Deutschland.
authors.forename: Christian
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Himstedt
authors.affiliation: Institut für Sozialmedizin und Epidemiologie der Universität Lübeck, Deutschland. Electronic address: ruth.deck@uksh.de.
authors.forename: Ruth
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Deck
mesh_terms: D026683:Advisory Committees / Q000458:organization & administration*; D000359:Aftercare / Q000458:organization & administration* / Q000592:standards; D032921:Consensus; D003299:Cooperative Behavior; D003697:Delphi Technique; D005240:Feasibility Studies; D005858:Germany; D006301:Health Services Needs and Demand / Q000458:organization & administration* / Q000592:standards; D019458:Insurance Coverage / Q000458:organization & administration / Q000592:standards; D033183:Interdisciplinary Communication; D009313:National Health Programs / Q000458:organization & administration / Q000592:standards; D011785:Quality Assurance, Health Care / Q000458:organization & administration / Q000592:standards; D012017:Referral and Consultation / Q000458:organization & administration*; D012040:Regional Health Planning / Q000458:organization & administration / Q000592:standards; D012046:Rehabilitation / Q000458:organization & administration* / Q000592:standards
keywords: Post-rehabilitation support; Qualität; Rehabilitationsnachsorge; aftercare; benchmark; quality; vergleichende Bewertung von Nachsorgeangeboten