BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Development of interventions to manage patients with stroke after discharge from the hospital requires estimates of need. This study estimates the prevalence of self-reported need in community-dwelling stroke survivors across the United Kingdom. METHODS: We conducted a survey of stroke survivors 1 to 5 years poststroke recruited through Medical Research Council General Practice Research Framework general practices and 2 population-based stroke registers. Levels and type of need were calculated with comparisons among sociodemographic groups, disability level, and cognitive status using the χ2 test or Fisher exact test, as appropriate. RESULTS: From 1251 participants, response rates were 60% (national sample) and 78% (population registers sample) with few differences in levels of reported need between the 2 samples. Over half (51%) reported no unmet needs; among the remainder, the median number of unmet needs was 3 (range, 1 to 13). Proportions reporting unmet clinical needs ranged from 15% to 59%; 54% reported an unmet need for stroke information; 52% reported reduction in or loss of work activities, significantly more from black ethnic groups (P=0.006); 18% reported a loss in income and 31% an increase in expenses with differences by age, ethnic group, and deprivation score. In multivariable analysis, ethnicity (P=0.032) and disability (P=0.014) were associated with total number of unmet needs. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple long-term clinical and social needs remain unmet long after incident stroke. Higher levels of unmet need were reported by people with disabilities, from ethnic minority groups, and from those living in the most deprived areas. Development and testing of novel methods to meet unmet needs are required.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Development of interventions to manage patients with stroke after discharge from the hospital requires estimates of need. This study estimates the prevalence of self-reported need in community-dwelling stroke survivors across the United Kingdom. METHODS: We conducted a survey of stroke survivors 1 to 5 years poststroke recruited through Medical Research Council General Practice Research Framework general practices and 2 population-based stroke registers. Levels and type of need were calculated with comparisons among sociodemographic groups, disability level, and cognitive status using the χ2 test or Fisher exact test, as appropriate. RESULTS: From 1251 participants, response rates were 60% (national sample) and 78% (population registers sample) with few differences in levels of reported need between the 2 samples. Over half (51%) reported no unmet needs; among the remainder, the median number of unmet needs was 3 (range, 1 to 13). Proportions reporting unmet clinical needs ranged from 15% to 59%; 54% reported an unmet need for stroke information; 52% reported reduction in or loss of work activities, significantly more from black ethnic groups (P=0.006); 18% reported a loss in income and 31% an increase in expenses with differences by age, ethnic group, and deprivation score. In multivariable analysis, ethnicity (P=0.032) and disability (P=0.014) were associated with total number of unmet needs. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple long-term clinical and social needs remain unmet long after incident stroke. Higher levels of unmet need were reported by people with disabilities, from ethnic minority groups, and from those living in the most deprived areas. Development and testing of novel methods to meet unmet needs are required.
Authors: Daniela C Gonçalves-Bradley; Anne-Marie Boylan; Constantinos Koshiaris; Maria Vazquez Montes; Gary A Ford; Daniel S Lasserson Journal: Fam Pract Date: 2015-09-30 Impact factor: 2.267
Authors: Lisa Shaw; Nawaraj Bhattarai; Robin Cant; Avril Drummond; Gary A Ford; Anne Forster; Richard Francis; Katie Hills; Denise Howel; Anne Marie Laverty; Christopher McKevitt; Peter McMeekin; Christopher Price; Elaine Stamp; Eleanor Stevens; Luke Vale; Helen Rodgers Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2020-05 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Chengwei Li; Jonggyu Baek; Brisa N Sanchez; Lewis B Morgenstern; Lynda D Lisabeth Journal: Ann Epidemiol Date: 2018-07-24 Impact factor: 3.797
Authors: Helen Rodgers; Helen Bosomworth; Hermano I Krebs; Frederike van Wijck; Denise Howel; Nina Wilson; Tracy Finch; Natasha Alvarado; Laura Ternent; Cristina Fernandez-Garcia; Lydia Aird; Sreeman Andole; David L Cohen; Jesse Dawson; Gary A Ford; Richard Francis; Steven Hogg; Niall Hughes; Christopher I Price; Duncan L Turner; Luke Vale; Scott Wilkes; Lisa Shaw Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2020-10 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Monique R Pappadis; Shilpa Krishnan; Catherine C Hay; Beata Jones; Angelle M Sander; Susan C Weller; Timothy A Reistetter Journal: Aging Ment Health Date: 2018-10-27 Impact factor: 3.658
Authors: Benjamin Hotter; Inken Padberg; Andrea Liebenau; Petra Knispel; Sabine Heel; Diethard Steube; Jörg Wissel; Ian Wellwood; Andreas Meisel Journal: Eur Stroke J Date: 2018-04-19