ИСТИНА

Objectives. Both in Russian and foreign neuropsychological traditions there are theoretical and methodical difficulties: 1) to establish the patients actual level in tasks and in the use of cognitive functions; 2) to plan the rehabilitation goals; 3) to make connections between neuropsychological assessment, rehabilitation and ICF domains. Participants and Methods. Approaches to rehabilitation after brain injury differ. In Russian school, rehabilitation of higher cortical functions relates mostly on L.S. Vygotsky-A.R. Luria traditions. Rehabilitation is understood as functional rebuilding of the whole functional system. This approach shows impressive results in rehabilitation of speech, writing, reading and calculation. In West tradition, cognitive rehabilitation addresses not only cognitive functions, but everyday life, and does not suppose profound functional reorganization of the system. Development of holistic approach allowed inclusion of the rehabilitation into real life activities with inclusion of emotional and motivational sphere. Results. Benefits of traditional Russian approach is its systematicity, limitation – in neglection of the spheres that cannot undergo systemic reorganization. Benefits of West approach include holistic work with any deficits, limitations – absence of systematicity. Another approach to rehabilitation, complex A.N. Leontiev approach based on activity, is suggested. Performance may be realized on three levels: operations, actions (including mental) and activity that is based on motives and meanings and is realized in behavior. Conclusions. The proposed model includes cognitive-behavioral, holistic and traditional Russian approaches to rehabilitation and may be feasible for the goal of establishment of rehabilitation prognosis, potential and effect in accordance with ICF.