Marufat O Odetunde, Olumide A Olaoye, Halimat O Ogwogho, Ayodele Teslim Onigbinde
{"title":"在资源匮乏的环境中，中风幸存者在社区行走的促进因素和障碍是否有所不同？尼日利亚的一项横断面研究。","authors":"Marufat O Odetunde, Olumide A Olaoye, Halimat O Ogwogho, Ayodele Teslim Onigbinde","doi":"10.1080/10749357.2024.2411876","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Stroke survivors (SSV) in many low- and middle-income countries experience frustrating participation restriction in community ambulation (CA), which impedes community life. This study assessed facilitators and barriers to CA among community-dwelling SSV in a southwest state of Nigeria.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional study involved 66 community-dwelling ambulating SSV, purposively recruited from physiotherapy out-patient clinics of selected hospitals in southwest Nigeria. Semi-structured questionnaire containing physical and social environment elements of the ICF domains was administered on respondents. Mobility status at home and community, socio-demographic and clinical data of SSV were also obtained. Responses from open-ended questions were triangulated with appropriate close ended options. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and logistic regression at <i>p</i> < 0.05 Alpha value.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Majority of the SSV were independent in their homes (59.1%), used mobility aids (87.9%) and assisted in CA (66.7%). They identified limited physical accessibility by crowds 25 (37.9%), lack of inclined surfaces 40 (95.2%), uneven floors 36 (87.8%), public seating arrangements 33 (78.6%), rain (73.8%) and inability to use services, systems and policies (77.3%) as barriers to CA. Built physical environment was a significant predictor of home (OR = 0.754, <i>p</i> = 0.001) and community mobility (OR = 0.850; <i>p</i> = 0.018), while post-stroke depression was a significant predictor of community mobility (OR = 1.038; <i>p</i> = 0.014).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Mobility aids, social attitudes and general support were identified as facilitators, whereas barriers to CA included built physical environment, services and policies, products and technology. Facilitators and barriers to CA are similar to some HIC contexts, perceived difficulties and experiences differ for infrastructural and social reasons among others.</p>","PeriodicalId":23164,"journal":{"name":"Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":"1-13"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do facilitators and barriers to community ambulation differ among stroke survivors in low resource settings? A cross-sectional study in Nigeria.\",\"authors\":\"Marufat O Odetunde, Olumide A Olaoye, Halimat O Ogwogho, Ayodele Teslim Onigbinde\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10749357.2024.2411876\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Stroke survivors (SSV) in many low- and middle-income countries experience frustrating participation restriction in community ambulation (CA), which impedes community life. This study assessed facilitators and barriers to CA among community-dwelling SSV in a southwest state of Nigeria.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional study involved 66 community-dwelling ambulating SSV, purposively recruited from physiotherapy out-patient clinics of selected hospitals in southwest Nigeria. Semi-structured questionnaire containing physical and social environment elements of the ICF domains was administered on respondents. Mobility status at home and community, socio-demographic and clinical data of SSV were also obtained. Responses from open-ended questions were triangulated with appropriate close ended options. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and logistic regression at <i>p</i> < 0.05 Alpha value.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Majority of the SSV were independent in their homes (59.1%), used mobility aids (87.9%) and assisted in CA (66.7%). They identified limited physical accessibility by crowds 25 (37.9%), lack of inclined surfaces 40 (95.2%), uneven floors 36 (87.8%), public seating arrangements 33 (78.6%), rain (73.8%) and inability to use services, systems and policies (77.3%) as barriers to CA. Built physical environment was a significant predictor of home (OR = 0.754, <i>p</i> = 0.001) and community mobility (OR = 0.850; <i>p</i> = 0.018), while post-stroke depression was a significant predictor of community mobility (OR = 1.038; <i>p</i> = 0.014).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Mobility aids, social attitudes and general support were identified as facilitators, whereas barriers to CA included built physical environment, services and policies, products and technology. Facilitators and barriers to CA are similar to some HIC contexts, perceived difficulties and experiences differ for infrastructural and social reasons among others.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23164,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-13\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10749357.2024.2411876\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10749357.2024.2411876","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
Do facilitators and barriers to community ambulation differ among stroke survivors in low resource settings? A cross-sectional study in Nigeria.
Purpose: Stroke survivors (SSV) in many low- and middle-income countries experience frustrating participation restriction in community ambulation (CA), which impedes community life. This study assessed facilitators and barriers to CA among community-dwelling SSV in a southwest state of Nigeria.
Methods: This cross-sectional study involved 66 community-dwelling ambulating SSV, purposively recruited from physiotherapy out-patient clinics of selected hospitals in southwest Nigeria. Semi-structured questionnaire containing physical and social environment elements of the ICF domains was administered on respondents. Mobility status at home and community, socio-demographic and clinical data of SSV were also obtained. Responses from open-ended questions were triangulated with appropriate close ended options. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and logistic regression at p < 0.05 Alpha value.
Results: Majority of the SSV were independent in their homes (59.1%), used mobility aids (87.9%) and assisted in CA (66.7%). They identified limited physical accessibility by crowds 25 (37.9%), lack of inclined surfaces 40 (95.2%), uneven floors 36 (87.8%), public seating arrangements 33 (78.6%), rain (73.8%) and inability to use services, systems and policies (77.3%) as barriers to CA. Built physical environment was a significant predictor of home (OR = 0.754, p = 0.001) and community mobility (OR = 0.850; p = 0.018), while post-stroke depression was a significant predictor of community mobility (OR = 1.038; p = 0.014).
Conclusion: Mobility aids, social attitudes and general support were identified as facilitators, whereas barriers to CA included built physical environment, services and policies, products and technology. Facilitators and barriers to CA are similar to some HIC contexts, perceived difficulties and experiences differ for infrastructural and social reasons among others.
期刊介绍：
Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation is the leading journal devoted to the study and dissemination of interdisciplinary, evidence-based, clinical information related to stroke rehabilitation. The journal’s scope covers physical medicine and rehabilitation, neurology, neurorehabilitation, neural engineering and therapeutics, neuropsychology and cognition, optimization of the rehabilitation system, robotics and biomechanics, pain management, nursing, physical therapy, cardiopulmonary fitness, mobility, occupational therapy, speech pathology and communication. There is a particular focus on stroke recovery, improving rehabilitation outcomes, quality of life, activities of daily living, motor control, family and care givers, and community issues.
The journal reviews and reports clinical practices, clinical trials, state-of-the-art concepts, and new developments in stroke research and patient care. Both primary research papers, reviews of existing literature, and invited editorials, are included. Sharply-focused, single-issue topics, and the latest in clinical research, provide in-depth knowledge.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
