背景與目的：近年來臺灣推動「長期照顧十年計畫」政策，居家物理治療服務因應民眾需求逐年增加而快速發展。本研究目的調查接受「長照十年計畫」之居家物理治療服務個案狀況及治療成效。方法：對象來自民國101至106年期間經高雄市長照中心照管專員轉介高雄市物理治療師公會長照團隊接受居家物理治療個案，並以至少接受完成2次以上治療個案進行成效評估。以配對t檢定分析個案居家物理治療前後評估療效測量值之間差異，獨立樣本t檢定比較個案接受6~12次居家物理治療與2~5次治療兩組之間療效測量值的差異。結果：101至106年度接受2次（含）以上居家物理治療個案共計2,215位。其中，1,589位接受6~12次治療並且完成治療前後成效評量；比較個案巴氏量表（前測平均27.2±26.4分vs.後測38.6±31.6分，p<0.05）、Motricity量表上肢主要肌肉群肌力（62.6±21.4分vs.68.4±20.0分，p<0.05）及下肢主要肌肉群肌力（53.0±20.8分vs.60.3±20.5分，p<0.05）、簡易版伯格氏平衡量表（4.1±5.6分vs.9.9±7.1分，p<0.05）治療前後成效，統計上皆呈現顯著性差異；進一步比較接受6~12次居家物理治療個案之日常生活功能、上下肢主要肌力及平衡功能分數改變量均明顯優於僅接受2~5次居家物理治療個案（p<0.01）。結論：「長期照顧十年計畫」居家物理治療對於改善個案日常生活功能、增進上下肢主要肌肉群肌力及平衡功能皆有所助益。本研究可提供後續推動「長期計畫2.0」居家復能政策施行之參考。

Background and Purpose: The need for home physical therapy services has increased during the recent years with the endorsement of the 10-year long-term care plan in Taiwan. This study aimed to investigate the condition of the clients who used the home physical therapy services provided by the 10-year 1ong-term care plan and to evaluate the effects of home physical therapy. Methods: All subjects who had been referred by the care managers of the Kaohsiung Long-Term Care Resource Management Center to the Long-Term Care Team of the Society of Kaohsiung Physical Therapists and had received the home physical therapy services for at least 2 times from 2012 to 2017. A paired t-test was used to assess the effects of home physical therapy. The difference in the effects between receiving physical therapy services from 2 to 5 and from 6 to 12 times was evaluated using an independent t-test. Results: During the 6-year study period, a total of 2,215 clients received home physical therapy at least 2 times. Only 1,589 of the clients received home physical therapy at least 6 times and had completed both assessments before the commencement and after receiving the physical therapy services. Compared with baseline, there were significant improvements in the activities of daily living (ADL) function (Barthel index [BI]: 27.2 ± 26.4 vs. 38.6 ± 31.6, p < 0.05), muscle strength of upper extremity (motricity index [MI]: 62.6 ± 21.4 vs. 68.4 ± 20.0, p < 0.05) and lower extremity (MI: 53.0 ± 20.8 vs. 60.3 ± 20.5, p < 0.05), and balance function [short-form Berg Balance Scale (SFBBS): 4.1 ± 5.6 vs. 9.9 ± 7.1, p < 0.05]. Furthermore, the improvement in the subjects who received home physical therapy from 6 to12 times was significantly greater in terms of BI, MI, and SFBBS (p < 0.01) compared with those who received it from 2 to 5 times. Conclusion: Home physical therapy provided by the 10-year long-term care plan is effective for the clients in improving ADL, muscle strength, and balance function. These findings can provide insights into issues related to the provision of home reablement services in the future long-term care plan 2.0 in Taiwan.