Objective To examine the frequency and timing of inpatient engagement in meaningful activities within rehabilitation (within and outside of structured therapy times) and determine the associations between activity type, goal awareness, and patient affect.Methods This prospective observational study performed behavioral mapping in a 42-bed inpatient brain injury rehabilitation unit by recording patient activity every 15 minutes (total 42 hours). The participants were randomly selected rehabilitation inpatients with acquired brain injury; all completed the study. The main outcome measures included patient demographics, observation of activity, participation, goal awareness, and affect.Results The inpatients spent 61% of the therapeutic day (8:30 to 16:30) in their single room and were alone 49% of the time. They were physically socially inactive for 76% and 74% of their awake time, respectively, with neutral affect observed for about half of this time. Goal-related activities were recorded for only 25% of the inpatients’ awake time. The odds of physical activity were 10.3-fold higher among in patients receiving support to address their goals within their rehabilitation program (odds ratio=10.3; 95% confidence interval, 5.02–21.16).Conclusion Inpatients in a mixed brain injury rehabilitation unit spent a large amount of their awake hours inactive and only participated in goal-related activities for a quarter of their awake time. Rehabilitation models that increase opportunities for physical, cognitive, and social activities outside of allied health sessions are recommended to increase overall activity levels during inpatient rehabilitation.

Background and Aim: Rehabilitation therapy is a key part of the recovery pathway for people with severe acquired brain injury (ABI). The aim of this study was to explore inpatients’ and their family members’ experiences of a specialist ABI rehabilitation service. Methods: A cross sectional, prospective mixed method study was undertaken at a metropolitan specialist ABI rehabilitation unit in Victoria, Australia. All inpatients and their family members of the service were invited to complete a satisfaction survey. Employing purposive sampling, semi-structured interviews were conducted with inpatients and/or their family members. Results: In total, 111 people completed the satisfaction survey and 13 were interviewed. High levels of satisfaction with the specialist service were reported; the majority of inpatients (74%) and family members (81%) rated the overall quality of care received in the service as ‘high’ or ‘very high’. Interviews revealed four main themes: (i) satisfaction with rehabilitation services, (ii) inconsistent communication, (iii) variable nursing care, and (iv) strengths and weakness of the rehabilitation environment. Overall, important components of a positive experience were being involved in decision making and discharge planning, effective communication and information processes, and being able to form therapeutic relationships with staff. Key sources of dissatisfaction for inpatients and family members related to inconsistency in care, accessing information about treatments in a format easily understood, and communication. Conclusion: Specialised rehabilitation is valued by inpatients and their family members alike. The findings highlight the importance of exploring inpatient experiences to optimise service delivery in a tailored, specialised rehabilitation programme.