BACKGROUND: Although priorities in Swedish stroke care should be based on the ethical principles of equal care and greatest support to those in greatest need, being of working age (younger) or retired (older) might influence expectations on recovery and the provision of care and rehabilitation. METHOD: Information regarding the use of care and rehabilitation during the 1st year after stroke was retrieved from the Stockholm County Council database and the medical data was taken from the medical records. The Barthel Index was used for self-ratings of dependence pre-stroke, and the Stroke Impact Scale was used to assess self-perceived disability and a global rating of recovery at 12 months. One hundred and ninety-two individuals were included. RESULTS: Results showed that the younger group received more care and rehabilitation than the older group. In the older group, comorbid conditions and pre-stroke dependence, estimated in accordance with the Barthel Index, were more common. The older group reported larger impact on self-perceived disability regarding strength, mobility, self-care and domestic life, while self-perceived global recovery did not differ between the groups. CONCLUSION: Younger individuals received more care and rehabilitation, which indicates structural inequality in the provision of health care resources. However, as no difference in self-perceived global recovery was found between the groups; the disparity in the provision of health care may also be a consequence of greatest support being given to those in greatest need. By demonstrating the necessity of involving self-rated assessments of stroke impact at different points in time and in different age groups, the results of this study add to previous knowledge of age-related differences in the provision of health care and stroke outcome. Furthermore, this suggests a way to approach evaluation of equality in the provision of health care.
BACKGROUND: Although priorities in Swedish stroke care should be based on the ethical principles of equal care and greatest support to those in greatest need, being of working age (younger) or retired (older) might influence expectations on recovery and the provision of care and rehabilitation. METHOD: Information regarding the use of care and rehabilitation during the 1st year after stroke was retrieved from the Stockholm County Council database and the medical data was taken from the medical records. The Barthel Index was used for self-ratings of dependence pre-stroke, and the Stroke Impact Scale was used to assess self-perceived disability and a global rating of recovery at 12 months. One hundred and ninety-two individuals were included. RESULTS: Results showed that the younger group received more care and rehabilitation than the older group. In the older group, comorbid conditions and pre-stroke dependence, estimated in accordance with the Barthel Index, were more common. The older group reported larger impact on self-perceived disability regarding strength, mobility, self-care and domestic life, while self-perceived global recovery did not differ between the groups. CONCLUSION: Younger individuals received more care and rehabilitation, which indicates structural inequality in the provision of health care resources. However, as no difference in self-perceived global recovery was found between the groups; the disparity in the provision of health care may also be a consequence of greatest support being given to those in greatest need. By demonstrating the necessity of involving self-rated assessments of stroke impact at different points in time and in different age groups, the results of this study add to previous knowledge of age-related differences in the provision of health care and stroke outcome. Furthermore, this suggests a way to approach evaluation of equality in the provision of health care.
Authors: Malin Tistad; Lena von Koch; Christina Sjöstrand; Kerstin Tham; Charlotte Ytterberg Journal: Health Expect Date: 2013-06-25 Impact factor: 3.377
Authors: Sarah M Salway; Nick Payne; Melanie Rimmer; Stefanie Buckner; Hannah Jordan; Jean Adams; Kate Walters; Sarah L Sowden; Lynne Forrest; Linda Sharp; Mira Hidajat; Martin White; Yoav Ben-Shlomo Journal: Int J Equity Health Date: 2017-07-11
Authors: Steinunn A Olafsdottir; Ingibjörg Hjaltadottir; Rose Galvin; Thora B Hafsteinsdottir; Helga Jonsdottir; Solveig A Arnadottir Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-08-25 Impact factor: 3.752
Authors: Malin Tistad; Maria Flink; Charlotte Ytterberg; Gunilla Eriksson; Susanne Guidetti; Kerstin Tham; Lena von Koch Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-08-05 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Minh Tuan Hoang; Ingemar Kåreholt; Mia von Euler; Linus Jönsson; Lena von Koch; Maria Eriksdotter; Sara Garcia-Ptacek Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2020 Impact factor: 4.472
Authors: Angela S Labberton; Mathias Barra; Ole Morten Rønning; Bente Thommessen; Leonid Churilov; Dominique A Cadilhac; Elizabeth A Lynch Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2019-11-21 Impact factor: 2.655