Disability is a multidimensional condition arising from the interaction between a person’s health status and environmental and personal factors. Many long-term conditions, including asthma, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, cancer, and neurological disorders, can result in functional limitations that affect daily activities and social participation. This study aimed to explore how adults with chronic diseases who hold official disability health board reports perceive their disability status and what they expect from disability services.
The research used a qualitative approach with a phenomenological orientation to illuminate lived experience. Although the analysis applied inductive content analysis rather than a formal phenomenological analytic procedure, the study retained a focus on participants’ personal meanings and accounts. Reporting followed the COREQ checklist.
Participants were recruited in Türkiye between 09/07/2024 and 07/01/2025 using purposive sampling combined with a snowball technique. Recruitment sources included a private hospital and a patient association for people with chronic diseases and disabilities. Inclusion criteria required age ≥18 years, at least one chronic disease, and possession of an official disability health board report. Twelve individuals participated; 70% were women and 50% had type 1 diabetes. The sample was selected to maximize heterogeneity in age, gender, education, employment, diagnosis, complications, degree of disability, and time since report issuance.
Data were collected through one-to-one, semi-structured interviews conducted in Turkish by a trained female nurse–researcher with qualitative research experience. Interviews were held either face-to-face in hospital settings or by telephone according to participant preference. A personal information form captured sociodemographic and clinical variables, including employment status, type and duration of chronic disease, presence of complications, degree and duration of disability, and ability to perform activities of daily living. No non-participants were present during interviews, and no prior personal relationships existed between researcher and participants.
Transcripts were analyzed using inductive content analysis informed by phenomenology to identify patterns and meanings across accounts. Sampling continued until sufficient depth and richness were attained and no substantially new codes or categories emerged, indicating saturation. The authors used standard qualitative procedures to generate themes that reflect participants’ experiences of disability and service expectations.
Eligibility was verified by participant self-report and confirmation of disability health board reports at recruitment. The datasets are not publicly available due to ethical restrictions and risk of re-identification; de-identified data can be requested from the Katip Çelebi University Non-Interventional Clinical Research Ethics Committee subject to institutional approval.
The study sample comprised 12 adults with chronic illnesses who had formal disability certification. Seventy percent were women; half reported type 1 diabetes as their chronic condition. Participants varied in other sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, as sought during purposive recruitment.
Participants described that disability related to chronic illness affected multiple life domains beyond physical functioning. Social and cultural participation, educational and professional opportunities, and quality of interpersonal relationships were frequently reported as areas of impact. The accounts emphasized that functional limitations often interacted with environmental and social barriers, producing disadvantage in everyday life and restricting meaningful participation in work, education, and cultural activities.
Despite holding official disability health board reports, many participants reported limited awareness of the range of disability services to which they were entitled. The study found informational gaps: formal certification did not necessarily translate into knowledge about available supports, rights, or how to access services. Participants’ limited awareness emerged as a key barrier to utilization.
Beyond information gaps, structural and practical barriers impeded access to services. Participants described difficulties in accessing supports even when they knew of entitlements. The findings point to mismatches between legal eligibility and effective, usable services in real-world settings. Issues included administrative complexity, insufficiently accessible environments, and barriers to participation in education and employment.
The study highlights a critical disconnect: formal recognition of disability through health board reports does not guarantee effective access to or use of supports. Both informational deficits and structural accessibility problems persist, limiting the ability of people with chronic diseases to benefit from rights-based entitlements. These gaps can exacerbate social exclusion and reduce quality of life despite legal frameworks intended to enable participation.
Disability arising from chronic illness affects multiple life domains, particularly social, cultural, educational, and professional areas. To translate formal entitlements into meaningful support, stakeholders should address both awareness and accessibility. Interventions that improve information provision about entitlements and simplify pathways to services, together with structural changes to enhance physical and administrative accessibility, are needed to bridge the gap between certification and utilisation.
Strengths of the study include purposive recruitment of individuals with confirmed disability reports and in-depth interviews that captured lived experience. Limitations include a small qualitative sample typical of phenomenological designs, recruitment from a limited number of sites, and reliance on self-report for some participant information; the authors note that qualitative findings are not intended to be statistically generalizable. The study suggests further research to quantify service gaps and evaluate interventions that improve information delivery and structural accessibility for people with chronic diseases and formal disability certification.
The authors reported no specific funding for the work and no competing interests. Acknowledgments and editorial information are provided in the source article. De-identified data access is managed through the institutional ethics committee.