Patients’ Experiences and Perceptions of MultidisciplinaryRehabilitation Services Following Stroke: A Qualitative Study

Abstract

Background: Multidisciplinary stroke rehabilitation addresses interacting physical, communicative, psychological, and social needs. Survivors accounts can clarify whether professional contributions are experienced as coordinated, personally relevant, and continuous across care settings.
Objective: To explore stroke survivors’ experiences and perceptions of multidisciplinary rehabilitation, focusing on coordination, communication, involvement in goal setting, and continuity between institutional rehabilitation and everyday recovery. Methods: A qualitative descriptive studyexamined rehabilitation experiences in Medan, Indonesia. The sample comprised 15 adult stroke survivors with experience of rehabilitation involving
at least three professional disciplines. The sampling strategy was maximum-variation purposive sampling. The author team conducted semistructured individual interviews and undertook reflexive thematic analysis through familiarisation, coding, identification of patterns across accounts, and theme development and refinement. Results: Participants included eight men and seven women aged 39–76 years; ten had experienced ischemic
stroke and five hemorrhagic stroke. Three interconnected themes described their experiences: “One Team, Many Voices”—coordination shaped confidence in rehabilitation; “Recovery Became Meaningful When the Goals Became Mine”—communication, autonomy, and individualized rehabilitation; and “The Hardest Part Began After Discharge”—continuity, accessibility, and rebuilding everyday life. Participants valued complementary professional expertise when roles and recommendations formed an understandable plan. Meaningful goals connected therapeutic activities with household tasks, family responsibilities, and employment. Preferences for involvement varied, and clinician guidance could bereassuring. Returning home could make rehabilitation more relevant while exposing environmental barriers, fatigue, financial and transportation difficulties, increased reliance on family, and uncertainty about further support. Conclusion: Participants experienced multidisciplinary rehabilitation positively when professional contributions were coherent, goals reflected valued activities, emotional concerns were recognised, and support remained understandable and accessible across settings. Their accounts suggest priorities for service organisation and further evaluation rather than evidence of comparative treatment effectiveness.