International Peer-Reviewed JournalOpen AccessISSN 2456-8880
irejournals@gmail.com+91-7433024337

Home / Current Issue / Paper 1722468

1722468 Vol 10 · Issue 2 Download Paper

Rehabilitation Across Borders: A Comparison of Physiotherapy and Occupational Therapy Services in India and South Korea

Srishti Sisodiya

Subject area: Biological & Medical Sciences  ·  Area of research: Rehabilitation Science

DOI: https://doi.org/10.64388/IREV10I2-1722468

Abstract

Rehabilitation is an essential component of healthcare for individuals living with disability, injury, neurological disorders, chronic diseases, developmental conditions and age-related functional limitations. Physiotherapy and occupational therapy are two important components within multidisciplinary rehabilitation. Although both professions contribute to improving functional independence and quality of life, their organization, regulation, accessibility and integration within healthcare systems differ across countries. This comparative narrative review examines physiotherapy and occupational therapy services in India and South Korea, with particular attention to professional regulation, rehabilitation infrastructure, workforce information, public and private service delivery, community-based rehabilitation, home-based care and technology-assisted approaches. Government publications, national statistical sources, regulatory documents and peer-reviewed literature were examined to identify major characteristics of rehabilitation systems in the two countries. India has developed a national regulatory framework for specified allied and healthcare professions and provides rehabilitation through government hospitals, disability rehabilitation programmes, district-level services and private healthcare facilities. South Korea has an established statutory framework for physical therapists and occupational therapists and a structured system of designated rehabilitation medical institutions. Both countries have significant rehabilitation capacity, but they face different challenges related to accessibility, workforce planning, population needs and service integration. The comparison suggests that India and South Korea can benefit from reciprocal learning rather than one-way policy transfer. India can draw lessons from South Korea’s structured rehabilitation institutions, workforce information, health-system organization and technology-assisted care, while South Korea can learn from India’s experience with community-oriented, geographically distributed and resource-adapted healthcare approaches. Practical cooperation through joint research, professional exchange, tele-rehabilitation, assistive technology and community-based pilot programmes could translate this mutual learning into measurable improvements in rehabilitation services.

Keywords

rehabilitation; physiotherapy; occupational therapy; india; south korea; allied healthcare; disability; community rehabilitation; healthcare accessibility; technology-assisted rehabilitation

References

[1] World Health Organization. Rehabilitation. Geneva: World Health Organization.

[2] World Health Organization. Rehabilitation 2030. Geneva: World Health Organization.

[3] World Health Organization. Guide for Rehabilitation Workforce Evaluation (GROWE). Geneva: World Health Organization; 2023.

[4] Government of India, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. National Commission for Allied and Healthcare Professions Act, 2021.

[5] Government of India, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. Physiotherapy Handbook. 2023.

[6] Government of India, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. Allied and Healthcare Professionals Enrolment Portal.

[7] Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities, Government of India. District Disability Rehabilitation Centres.

[8] Kamalanathan S, Chockalingam M, Sethuraman L, Moorthy SD, Muthuvel T. Occupational Therapy for Reducing Disabilities in Persons with Disabilities in India: A Systematic Review. Indian Journal of Occupational Therapy. 2021;53(1):4–14.

[9] Republic of Korea. Medical Service Technologists Act. Korean Law Information Center.

[10] Health Insurance Review & Assessment Service, Republic of Korea. Rehabilitation Medical Institution Designation and Evaluation.

[11] Statistics Korea. Korean Statistical Information Service (KOSIS): Medical Personnel by Province.

[12] Lim JH, Kim SY, Kim BG. A Survey on the Use of Outcome Measures during Physical Therapy Interventions by Physical Therapists in Korea. Healthcare. 2023;11(22):2933.

[13] Korea National Institute of Health. National rehabilitation and chronic disease research resources.

[14] Ayushman Bharat Digital Mission. National Health Facility Registry.

How to cite this paper

Srishti Sisodiya "Rehabilitation Across Borders: A Comparison of Physiotherapy and Occupational Therapy Services in India and South Korea" Iconic Research And Engineering Journals Volume 10 Issue 2 2026 Page 3061-3067 https://doi.org/10.64388/IREV10I2-1722468
Srishti Sisodiya "Rehabilitation Across Borders: A Comparison of Physiotherapy and Occupational Therapy Services in India and South Korea" Iconic Research And Engineering Journals, vol. 10, no. 2, Aug. 2026, doi: https://doi.org/10.64388/IREV10I2-1722468
Srishti Sisodiya (2026). Rehabilitation Across Borders: A Comparison of Physiotherapy and Occupational Therapy Services in India and South Korea. Iconic Research And Engineering Journals, 10(2). doi: https://doi.org/10.64388/IREV10I2-1722468
Srishti Sisodiya "Rehabilitation Across Borders: A Comparison of Physiotherapy and Occupational Therapy Services in India and South Korea" Iconic Research And Engineering Journals, vol. 10, no. 2, Aug. 2026. Crossref, https://doi.org/10.64388/IREV10I2-1722468
@article{1722468,
      author = {Srishti Sisodiya},
      title = {Rehabilitation Across Borders: A Comparison of Physiotherapy and Occupational Therapy Services in India and South Korea},
      journal = {Iconic Research And Engineering Journals},
      year = {2026},
      volume = {10},
      number = {2},
      pages = {3061-3067},
      issn = {2456-8880},
      url = {https://www.irejournals.com/formatedpaper/1722468.pdf},
      abstract = {Rehabilitation is an essential component of healthcare for individuals living with disability, injury, neurological disorders, chronic diseases, developmental conditions and age-related functional limitations. Physiotherapy and occupational therapy are two important components within multidisciplinary rehabilitation. Although both professions contribute to improving functional independence and quality of life, their organization, regulation, accessibility and integration within healthcare systems differ across countries.

This comparative narrative review examines physiotherapy and occupational therapy services in India and South Korea, with particular attention to professional regulation, rehabilitation infrastructure, workforce information, public and private service delivery, community-based rehabilitation, home-based care and technology-assisted approaches. Government publications, national statistical sources, regulatory documents and peer-reviewed literature were examined to identify major characteristics of rehabilitation systems in the two countries.

India has developed a national regulatory framework for specified allied and healthcare professions and provides rehabilitation through government hospitals, disability rehabilitation programmes, district-level services and private healthcare facilities. South Korea has an established statutory framework for physical therapists and occupational therapists and a structured system of designated rehabilitation medical institutions. Both countries have significant rehabilitation capacity, but they face different challenges related to accessibility, workforce planning, population needs and service integration.

The comparison suggests that India and South Korea can benefit from reciprocal learning rather than one-way policy transfer. India can draw lessons from South Korea’s structured rehabilitation institutions, workforce information, health-system organization and technology-assisted care, while South Korea can learn from India’s experience with community-oriented, geographically distributed and resource-adapted healthcare approaches. Practical cooperation through joint research, professional exchange, tele-rehabilitation, assistive technology and community-based pilot programmes could translate this mutual learning into measurable improvements in rehabilitation services.},
      keywords = {rehabilitation; physiotherapy; occupational therapy; india; south korea; allied healthcare; disability; community rehabilitation; healthcare accessibility; technology-assisted rehabilitation},
      month = {August},
      doi = {https://doi.org/10.64388/IREV10I2-1722468}
  }