Research studies in physical medicine have not demonstrated the effect
iveness of inpatient rehabilitation services, primarily due to differe
nces in methodological approaches which have led to inconsistent findi
ngs. Because of differing inclusion and outcome criteria, even meta-an
alyses have been inconclusive. To address this problem, research liter
ature comparing the clinical effectiveness of rehabilitation programs
with medical care was evaluated for three uniformly available outcome
criteria: survival; functional ability; and discharge location. Publis
hed trials were obtained from citations in Index Medicus (Medline) and
Nursing and Allied Health Abstracts covering the recent 20 year perio
d from 1974 to 1994. We used meta-analyses to test the hypotheses that
specialized rehabilitative care (vs conventional medical care) improv
es health outcomes. Results of our meta-analyses indicated that rehabi
litation services were significantly associated with better rates of s
urvival and improved function during hospital stay (P<0.01), but signi
ficance was not observed at follow-up. Also, rehabilitation patients r
eturned to their homes and remained there more frequently than control
s (P<0.001). We concluded that patients who participate in inpatient r
ehabilitation programs function better at hospital discharge, have a b
etter chance of short term survival, and return home more frequently t
han non-participants. However, long term survival and function were th
e same for experimental and control subjects. The sustaining benefit o
f returning home may suffice to justify the provision of inpatient reh
abilitation. However, the lack of other long term benefits suggests th
at services may need to be continued at home or in subacute care setti
ngs to optimize their effectiveness. Future research should include be
havioral outcomes so that the benefits of rehabilitative care can be e
valuated in more meaningful detail and can accurately reflect the psyc
hosocial objectives of rehabilitation programs.