Purpose
Last updated: November 2, 2025
Rehabilitation is a multiprofessional team activity; no one profession owns it, but all occupations involved must participate in an organisation that promotes rehabilitation expertise as part of training for all professionals involved in healthcare rehabilitation and represents the needs and interests of rehabilitation.
The paragraph above is my core understanding of rehabilitation. This website aims to establish a genuinely multiprofessional national organisation dedicated to promoting rehabilitation across all levels and forums. To accomplish this, it seeks to raise awareness of rehabilitation as a specialised field that transcends professional boundaries and necessitates a dedicated organisation to set national standards and qualifications. Such an organisation would support and collaborate with individual professional groups, with these qualifications serving as additional postgraduate credentials.
There are subsidiary and incidental purposes. The blog posts provide me with an opportunity to consider and discuss interesting topics, which I hope will enhance our understanding of certain aspects of rehabilitation and stimulate new ideas. The academic section is designed for trainees and researchers, providing the knowledge and skills necessary to become an expert. I derived much of the section from the medical Rehabilitation Medicine curriculum and syllabus, which I co-authored with others; however, I have rewritten it to apply to all professions. The other sections aim to improve understanding, knowledge and, crucially, skills in rehabilitation
Table of Contents
Introduction
Rehabilitation is no one’s responsibility; inadequate provision affects everyone in healthcare, and currently, no organisation represents the interests of rehabilitation. Several historical, cultural, and political features have led to this situation.
The concept of rehabilitation in healthcare emerged during the First World War, also known as the Great War. At the end of the war, in 1918, Major John Todd wrote, “It is well understood on this continent because of the many very excellent articles upon ‘rehabilitation’ which have appeared not only in scientific and semi-scientific publications but in the popular press.” I have not found any articles earlier than 1918; however, Major Todd’s comment suggests that many articles were written during the war.
Rehabilitation developed within a biomedical framework and was considered as another speciality, like surgery or cardiology. It was not associated with any particular organ, and its expertise was initially believed to be ‘physical therapy’. Although authors of papers all acknowledge the vital role of a multidisciplinary team approach at the time, only medical professionals recognised it as a speciality. Moreover, the lack of any theoretical basis and significant research or academic activity meant it had a lower priority than most other specialities.
The socio-economic culture was characterised by competition among professionals and organisations. This culture significantly hindered the development of any multiprofessional academic, clinical, or service departments. Multiprofessional organisations such as the UK Society for Research in Rehabilitation and the US American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine (ACRM) only emerged in the second half of the twentieth century. The ACRM is perhaps the only strong, influential multiprofessional healthcare rehabilitation organisation. It is “a vibrant group with diverse individual backgrounds from all over the world – all united with the common interests in rehabilitation and evidence-based research to enhance the lives of those with disabling conditions.”
Existing organisations.
The only formal multiprofessional rehabilitation organisation in the UK is the Society for Research in Rehabilitation, founded in 1978. As its name suggests, its primary purpose concerns research. It has not been significantly involved in promoting standards, influencing policies, or training.
The Community Rehabilitation Alliance is a multiprofessional group with the primary goal of improving community rehabilitation services. It has published standards. However, it lacks formal standing, membership, a constitution, and a website. I have discussed its formation and work on this site, suggesting it might evolve into a national organisation, but instead it seems to have become quiescent.
The British Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine has advocated strongly for rehabilitation since its foundation as the Medical Disability Society in 1984. While it was the British Society of Rehabilitation Medicine, it published numerous documents on rehabilitation, including guidelines, standards, and position statements. However, though there are some non-medical members, they are not eligible for full membership.
Why is an organisation needed?
I will explain this in more detail one day. What follows is a summary.
Clinically, we need all team members to be experts not only in their professional field, but also in rehabilitation, which is a specialist extension of the knowledge and skills, just like becoming an expert in gait analysis or treating people with dementia. The primary difference is that rehabilitation is a broad field.
Academically, we need a recognised organisation to devise and, more importantly, validate training and qualifications, which would need to identify different degrees of expertise. The model would be similar to the specialist training doctors must do to be certified as a specialist in rehabilitation.
Further, if there were a national rehabilitation faculty, universities would be incentivised to develop multiprofessional academic departments in rehabilitation. Currently, most departments are located within and primarily focus on one particular professional aspect, such as physiotherapy or, rarely, medicine.
Services would also benefit. Managers would also need specialist knowledge of rehabilitation and skills to manage a multiprofessional team, which is usually democratic and autonomous. The standards proposed by professional organisations such as the British Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, informal groups like the Community Rehabilitation Alliance, or patient organisations like the Neurological Alliance would carry much more weight and authority.
Patients would benefit. At present, they can only improve rehabilitation through the relatively powerless organisations mentioned. A multiprofessional national faculty would absolutely have to have patient representation as an equal partner in its activities.
The National Health Service would benefit because it would have a single organisation to approach about all rehabilitation matters and would receive much more holistic advice. Politicians and policymakers would also benefit from this approach.
Finally, society would benefit because the national organisation would promote a relatively consistent message about the nature and purpose of rehabilitation. There would and should be differences in emphasis, but these could be acknowledged and discussed openly rather than appearing to be a serious interprofessional conflict.
Purpose of this site – 1
The main underlying long-term goal is to demonstrate that rehabilitation requires a seamless multiprofessional approach across all boundaries, and that attempts to divide it by location, profession, disease, phase of illness, or in any other way lead to harm. The harm includes being less efficient and effective, resulting in patients receiving a lower quality service at a higher cost.
I hope I do not hammer this message home too dogmatically. The intention is to provide the evidence and allow readers to draw their own conclusions.
For example, although I am a doctor, the site covers all aspects of rehabilitation and rarely discusses medical interventions. Indeed, I generally avoid specifying any professions. Boundaries between professions are often invisible and vary around the country. Assuming, for example, that physiotherapists are entirely responsible for serial casting joints to control contractures would be unwise.
I hope that the content always respects and considers the patient’s view; a patient knows little about professional boundaries and cares less. They respect a team where members collaborate and respect one another, and they expect all services to work together across all borders, sharing information and responsibility.
Taking a biomedical perspective, a patient expects the drugs prescribed to reduce their blood pressure and has no concern about what each drug does or what drugs are used. Their view of different professions in rehabilitation will likely mirror this.
Purpose of this site – 2
The primary objectives are to inform, challenge, and enhance clinical, academic, and policy practices.
I dedicate a significant portion of the site to training and education. I have published rehabilitation capabilities and a syllabus suitable for any profession. I have based them on the doctors’ Rehabilitation Medicine curriculum and syllabus, which I led in developing and have adapted here. Other parts consider and explain the rehabilitation process and crucial concepts such as the biopsychosocial model of illness.
A second theme is developing ideas. For example, I have published many pages related to the General Theory of Rehabilitation, first published in Clinical Rehabilitation in 2024. Other ideas include rehabilitation thinking, the concept of biopsychosocial healthcare, and the importance of wisdom.
My blog posts often allow me to review interesting papers, hopefully encouraging other people to read them, and to develop my own ideas, frequently as I prepare to give a lecture or respond to someone’s question or comment.
I am also interested in how to do things, particularly organising services. For example, I have discussed rehabilitation networks and the evaluation of rehabilitation services.
Conclusion
When I started, setting up and developing the site was a direct response to other plans being thwarted; I had planned to work in a demanding role for several years, which did not materialise. In retrospect, I am delighted. At the time, the idea came to me in the middle of the night – around 2:00 a.m. – and in the morning, I registered the domain name I had thought of. It has proved to be a much better and potentially more influential use of my time.
The purposes given above are not new. Since starting in rehabilitation in 1980, I have wanted to improve it. My MD research project concerned service development. I undertook my first external review of a failing rehabilitation service in 1984, while still researching stroke services.