SAGE Journals Online
Advertisement
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Advertisement

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Clinical Rehabilitation
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kent, R. M
Right arrow Articles by Barnes, M. P
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kent, R. M
Right arrow Articles by Barnes, M. P
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

An epidemiological survey of the health needs of disabled people in a rural community

Ruth M Kent

Rheumatology and Rehabilitation Research Unit, University of Leeds, Leeds

Barbara J Chandler

Michael P Barnes

Academic Department of Neurological Rehabilitation, Hunters Moor Regional Rehabilitation Centre, Newcastle, UK

Objective:To describe service use and unmet needs of disabled people in a rural environment, given well-recognized difficulties in providing equitable services to a widely-spread population, availability of transport and the presence of discrepancies in wealth.

Participants: Disabled people registered with a single rural general practice, identified by postal questionnaire.

Method: All 3462 households were screened using the Office of Population, Censuses and Surveys (OPCS) disability screening questionnaire. An 86% response rate was achieved. Seventy-four people aged 16–65 and 69 people aged 66–75 were interviewed by a rehabilitation physician. Fifty-five people aged 76+ were interviewed. Disability was assessed using the OPCS scales of disability, Barthel Index, and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale.

Results: Thirty per cent (43) of those aged 16–75 received assistance for their personal activities of daily living (ADLs), and 98% (140) required assistance for extended ADLs (taken from the OPCS surveys criteria). There was no difference in either disability or dependency by age group. Fifty-three per cent of this group had domestic adaptations, 75% had disability aids. Those aged 16–75 had significantly fewer aids and adaptations, less home care, care management, respite, district nursing and chiropody services than people over 75. Equipment was provided by statutory services less frequently and fewer carers were salaried. The rehabilitation physician assessed them as needing more occupational therapy, physiotherapy and chiropody. Thirty per cent saw their GP monthly and 45% attended hospital.

Conclusion: Unmet need was assessed as greater in the younger group. Elderly people are possibly more visible to service providers with better recognition of need. There is no evidence of a relationship between medical surveillance and identification of rehabilitation needs. Those with greater degrees of disability require more interlinked and organized services.

Clinical Rehabilitation, Vol. 14, No. 5, 481-490 (2000)
DOI: 10.1191/0269215500cr350oa


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?




Advertisement